• Duranie@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Cook county tried it in Illinois a few years back, and it really made no sense.

      It didn’t apply to juices (even though juices are loaded with sugar) and it taxed sugar free sodas the same as their sugar sweetened versions. They charged 1 cent per ounce for the tax. It was repealed 4 months after initiating it.

      • Tehdastehdas@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        So they didn’t try a sugar tax, like Finland didn’t try basic income because opposing politicians sabotaged the trial in the planning stage to make the results worthless.

    • skye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      then you’ll probably end up with a black market of sugary drinks, and people will go to great lengths to get it.

      It’s almost as if this happened before with something else

    • credit crazy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s people like you that we can’t have nice things. oh some Germans in Germany has started genociding Jews out of existence, so that must mean that all Germans are evil Nazis. you only consider moderation when their is a obvious utility. like oh you don’t need alcohol to survive, but because some people get addicted to alcohol. we must ban alcohol, so no one will get addicted ever again. we seriously need to learn moderation and nuance. we really need to collectively agree that I’m not your mom and neither is the government. Otherwise we will be asking ourselves, what is the point of enjoyment? People who are miserable breath just fine, and if you enjoy something too much you might get addicted.

      • sandbox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I agree completely with your comment but I think you probably shouldn’t have brought the Holocaust into it really!

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    As someone with an intolerance to artificial sweeteners, I’ll never forgive Jamie Oliver for pushing the sugar tax, alongside his insistence on “improving” school meals that resulted in mass outsourcing of school food to the lowest bidder.

    Kids aren’t drinking less soft drinks than before, the drinks themselves have just replaced sugar with chemicals and byproducts that aren’t particularly healthy themselves…

    • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The point that should be taken from your comment is not that they replaced the sugar with something else because we dont yet know if the aspartame is better or worse than sugar, though we do k ow that sugar is bad in large quantities.

      What should be noted is that the study found that sugar consumption has halved, which seems to be a no brainer as the majority of soft drinks either contain half the amount or no sugar. I belive in the UK at least pepsi has half the sugar and almost everything else has no sugar. Coke is the only one that still has the full sugar content it had before. But they sell coke zero at such a low price now and push it with alternative flavours that it is being consumed in higher quantities than ever.

      The point being, yeah, the tax stopped drinks makers using sugar so the sugar consumption dropped.

      Like i stopped using salt to season my food and i found that my salt intake lowered… wow. Thats crazy.

    • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Have you considered drinking unsweetened stuff? Either plain water, or “flavoured” water. Basically soda without any sugar or sweeteners. It’s surprisingly tasty, and pretty much as healthy as pure water.

      Alternatively there are tons of different sweeteners. Some like stevia should be fine even if you have issues with, say, aspartame.

      • EnderMB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Sadly, Stevia doesn’t agree with me either, although I don’t feel as ill as if I have drinks with aspartame, which is what most drinks in the UK use.

        I recently bought a soda stream for just this, since I now mostly drink sparkling water. There aren’t many cordials here that don’t use a sweetener, and many of my previously favourite kombucha brands now use aspartame - but there’s enough to have some choice.

    • lordkuri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      replaced sugar with chemicals

      OH NO, NOT SCARY CHEMICALS!!!111

      Sugar is a chemical, ya dolt. So is water. So are most of the components that make up you.

      Man, education has really taken a nose dive…

      • EnderMB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Maybe leave the cuntery back over at Reddit…

        This community is supposed to be for uplifting news.

          • EnderMB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Then call it out, but maybe not be such a cunt about it. It’s an embarrassment for the fediverse that someone can’t be civil to what is a fair comment, even if it’s not factually accurate. Even on cesspools like Reddit you wouldn’t see this kind of toxicity.

            • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              It’s an embarrassment for the fediverse that someone can’t be civil to what is a fair comment

              It wasn’t a fair comment though was it it was an attempt to spread utterly false information. Also I’m sorry, but I completely do not accept this premise that somehow Lemmy is better than Reddit.

              • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                It was absolutely a fair comment.

                The quoted part of the comment makes it seem like “chemicals” is the subject of the assertion. It’s not. The comment goes on to describe what chemicals and why they’re a concern.

                Yes, it’s not a great comment, it’s not eloquent, it could be more concise… but that doesn’t mean it’s appropriate to make disingenuous misrepresentations about the authors intended meaning.

                • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Okay well I will challenge the content of the comment and you can make arbitrary and utterly unfounded comments about my assessment.

                  But apparently I’m not allowed to call out insanity wherever it appears because that would be rude. God save me, I was rude to an ass wipe.

  • then_three_more@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    It worked so of course they didn’t extend it to other things with more hidden sugars (things like pasta sauce, flavoured yoghurts etc)

    • Chewget@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      gtfo of here with sugar in my pasta sauce. It makes no sense and tastes bad.

      And boxed macaroni and cheese, hamburger helper, etc. NoW wItH AdDeD SuGAr! Get all the way out of here with that nonsense. Stopped eating it a while ago, but people depend on cheap easy meals.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    That’s not because the sugar tax was enough.

    It’s because the drink manufacturers mostly just stopped selling the full sugar versions, which kind of sucks for anyone who hates the taste of artificial sweeteners. Even squash like Robinsons became undrinkable. It tastes like battery acid.

    There’s only really Coca-Cola left that tastes the same as it did before. Lemon and lime drinks like 7-Up or Sprite almost cover the taste of it, so they’ll do in a pinch. Otherwise I just drink water and cider. Apparently alcoholic drinks don’t need to tell you how many calories are in them either, so I’ll assume it’s none and carry on looking confused when I get on the scales.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s because the drink manufacturers mostly just stopped selling the full sugar versions

      Which was a result of the sugar tax. They didn’t just suddenly drop the sugar content for no reason.

      • Liz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        The sugar tax didn’t include artificial sweeteners? That’s an oversight. Those things are bad for you in ways that are different from digestable sugars.

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          They’re nowhere near as bad as consuming a huge amount of sugar.

          They only cause issues for a vanishingly tiny amount of people that have pre-existing genetic conditions.

          • EnderMB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            That’s highly debatable. It’s swapping one set of side effects for another, especially when drunk at high volumes.

            • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              It’s not highly debatable, it’s been studied to death. Sweeteners have existed for a long time.

              There were rumours they cause cancer, this has been proven false. There were rumours they cause headaches, this has been proven false. There were rumours they cause infertility, this has been proven false. There have been rumours they stimulate your appetite, this likewise has zero scientific backing.

              Aspartame, the most common sweetener, does cause issues for people with phenylketonuria, a rare genetic disorder, because it contains stuff they can’t metabolise. But so does a long list of foods people eat every day.

              Some polyol sweeteners have a mild laxative effect if consumed in very high quantities, but the same is true for stuff like tea, coffee, most fruits, etc.

              Sugar is far worse for your health.

  • Mindtraveller@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Great, now all the undernourished kids with poor parents are going to drink water instead and lose weight to dangerously unhealthy levels.

    According to The Guardian (same source as this article), the number of children in food poverty in the UK is 4 million. 15% of UK households went hungry in January. Now, soda isn’t the smartest source of calories in a kid’s diet. It’s expensive and low in other nutrients. But kids aren’t always smart. A poor kid thinks “I’m hungry, I have a few pounds, there’s a vending machine, problem solved”. If the soda is too expensive, that doesn’t mean the kid is going to go to Aldi, buy some potatoes, and roast them for a cheap and nutritious meal. They’re a kid! It means they’ll pay more or go without. Which means you’re making the poverty and malnutrition problem worse.

    • BugKilla@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      What source can you cite that shows that children in poverty primarily source their calories from soft drinks/soda and now will be at greater risk of nutritional deficit specifically as a result of this tax?

      Food poverty is clearly related to cost of living issues and social inequity all greatly exacerbated by Brexit, not a tax on sugar.

      This site provides data and resources for more information.

      https://foodfoundation.org.uk

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Food poverty is a problem in the UK but drinking Coke isn’t the solution. If you look at the nutrition information on the can of your average soda it’s basically either sugar or artificial sweeteners and nothing else. No calories in that there’s no proteins in that you can’t live off it so who cares if there’s less sugar in it?

      Also food banks exist, they absolutely should not have to and it’s a disgrace that they do, blame Cameron and his big society nonsense, but they do exist and in large numbers. I don’t think there’s anywhere in the country that you couldn’t get free food if you needed it.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I think the stupidest thing about food banks is they give the same random bags of food to poor and homeless people, so I often see carrier bags with tins of beans or dry pasta just dumped by the roadside because what the fuck is a homeless person going to do with 600g Aldi penne pasta?

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I work in a food bank and that is not what they do. We have a different food bags for different people, typically they are divided into people who have no way to cook food, people who only have access to a microwave, and people who have access to a proper kitchen.

          Tin food gets given to people who have access to a microwave and if they need one they can even get a tin opener. Although we seem to give 10 openers to the same same 12 people again and again I have no idea what they’re doing with them but we have hundreds of the damn things.

          Once they’ve picked up that bag they can then go to the tables and pick up extras that they like. The bags will contain things like tin soup and pasta, assuming they have access to cook it, and then they can put in fruit and vegetables as they like. There is no point giving vegetables to people who won’t eat them, it’s just a waste of food, so that’s why it’s done like that.

          We have very few people who come to the food bank who literally have no way to cook food because the local church has a few microwaves that I believe they can come and use whenever they want. There’s always the odd person who’s just awkward though, so they get bread and peanut butter, crackers and a bit of cheese. It is rather hard to accommodate them but they are accommodated when they turn up.