What Is The Effect Of The Over-Supply Of Sweetened Consumptions

Sugar addiction is a problem that has been in our society for many years. In today's world this type of addiction is being composed into drinks. Sugary drinks are found everywhere from local stores, to in home refrigerators. Sodas, juices, and energy drinks, all fall under unhealthy remedies to thirst. Sugar addiction can only restrain us from accomplishing healthy goals in life. Sugary drinks can lead to harming one's body. Over the past few years, many cities and states have considered taxing sodas and other sugary beverages. Sugary drinks must be tax due to its unhealthy components and addiction.

Sugar is everywhere in our lives. When you eat, sugar is in the food such as hamburger, sandwiches, pizza, bread, etc. When you drink, sugar is in the beverage like soda, juice, coffee and even milk. Furthermore, sugar exists in snacks such as cookies, cupcakes, biscuits and so on. I cannot list everything with sugar here. Actually, when we eat, we eat sugar. Unfortunately, sugar is now considering a toxic to our bodies. It causes diseases like obesity, diabetes, heart attack and cancer, etc. As sugar threatens the public health, government is considering curb sugar consumption by taxes on sugar; restrictions placed on food production and even age requirements on purchasing sugary foods. For this research project, I decided to pursue the question, Should sugar be regulated? This question deserves to be examined because we need to make some change for life to reduce sugar intake but at the same time it’s controversial that whether the government should intervene and regulate sugar. I wonder how the government will take appropriate measures to regulate sugar as well as improve public health.

By imposing a sugar beverage tax, consumers will demand less of the good and drive demand downward. Similarly, the sugary beverage market is elastic to price changes ("Price elasticity of the demand for sugar sweetened beverages and soft drinks in Mexico"). If the prices of sugar beverages increase, the demand will decrease ("Price elasticity of the demand for sugar sweetened beverages and soft drinks in Mexico"). However, a counterclaim does arise which argues that even if consumers of these beverages decide to stop purchasing a taxed good, they will purchase substitute goods that have the same satisfactory effect at a price that isn't affected by the tax. This idea was presented by Jason Fletcher from the University of Wisconsin. In his published research, Fletcher found that BMI remained constant or increased even when consumers are confronted with a beverage tax (Fletcher, Frisvold & Tefft 2009).

Consumers think that it is awful that they have to pay for someone else’s health care while that person may just as well be drinking twelve cans of soda daily and continually destroying their health. (“Should there be a”, n.d.) These consumers are hoping the soda tax will encourage people to stop abusing soda and at the same time lowering the obesity rate in our country, which now about 66% of our population. Some commenters also said that the government is doing the right thing to try and stop this

“Soda Taxes: Gaining Steam or Getting Steamrolled?” is an enticing article by Anna Gorman that focuses on the issue of taxing sugary beverages and the effect it will ultimately have on the health of the general population. She mentions that the tax could reduce the rates of obesity and diabetes in the affected areas. She also points out the counter to this claim, that soda taxes may not have any effect on obesity rates at all and may give the government too much power over the consumer choice. Overall, she seems to advocate that soda is an unhealthy beverage and should be cut down among consumers. Soda however, is not the only unhealthy options out there. There is a plethora of products on the shelves of supermarkets and sold at restaurants.

The debate on weather sugary drinks, especially soda, should be taxed or not has been a topic for years. Some people believe that they should be taxed for the improvement of health while on the other hand some people think that taxing the drinks won't do much and actually hurt people. Taxing sugary drinks is helpful to those who have a hard time with temptation for the drinks. In the article "Do Soda Taxes Really Work?" Sifferlin states that when researchers looked at Berkeley residents, they found that when taxing soda started "sales of sugary-sweetened drinks fell by close 10% and sales of water increased in Berkeley by about 16%" (4) Just by the percent difference rasing prices on soda made people decide against buying the sweet drinks,

Outline I. Introduction A. States around the nation are trying to put taxes on sodas. The main reason behind this tax is that it will reduce medical cost, obesity, diabetes, and the taxes will provide money for the states. B. Negative Externalities are the failures that happen because the producers do not take into account the costs that are impose on others. The producers do not pay for these costs and they produce more of that product because they avoid these costs. II.

If you take one look at an average adults daily sugar consumption that is encouraged by these companies, you will soon be raising your eyebrows too. 14.6 kilograms…. That’s how much sugar the average Australian soft drink lover is consuming every year from soft drinks alone, this is equivalent to indulging in three bags of potatoes, instead filled with pure sugar. This huge amount of sugar intake is leading to high rates of overweight and obesity which intern lead to type two diabetes, heart disease and cancers. But there’s a simple way to reduce sugary drink consumption and that’s by increasing the price through a 20 percent tax on sugar drinks. This would decrease the consumption of sugary drinks and also reduce the rates of overweight and obesity, therefor reducing the amount of Australians with type 2 diabetes, heart disease and

"' They are literally holding hostage the jobs of hardworking people in their battle to overturn the tax.'" ( Sifferlin 5). How could the taxing of sugary drinks, specifically soda, be beneficial if it's the cause of soda companies like Pepsi putting the jobs of their employees in the hands of taxes? How do people expect these taxes to work if they are being misguided on their cause? How will these taxes work if the drinks are still available, and if all these questions arise, how is it possible for these taxes to actually be anything but a hassle? The questions that surface can support the fact that as they are enforced,the taxes are unnecessary and causing less help than people think; they can be presented as an inconvenience

The idea of beginning a tax on sugary drinks is nowhere near a new one. Many people immediately jump to soda whenever they hear this idea, and that’s where most people see the problem surrounding the sugary drink debate. I see the problem not with the products themselves but how they are abused to the point where they can become a problem to the consumer. Like most things, it’s all good in moderation but once you start to have three to four cans or bottles a day it can start to be an issue. Thats where this proposed tax is supposed to come in and save the day. Or so that’s what most of us have been told, and some of us believe. But maybe this new tax doesn’t need to have a place in our society.

The first question in Kass’s formulaic approach to the ethics of public health is “What are the public health goals of this program?” (Kass, 1777) By nature, the public health goal of any program is to essentially promote the overall health of a population through an organized and communal effort. In the case of the soda tax, the ultimate public health goal is simply to reduce the amount of morbidity & mortality and improve the well being of society. This begins by tackling the obesity problem, which is directly linked to morbidity & mortality. According to Brownell, “for each extra can or glass of sugared beverage consumed per day, the likelihood of a child’s becoming obese increases by 60%” (Brownell et al., 1599). It can be inferred that drinking soda is linked to obesity rates, but why should obesity rates matter? According to Sturm, “a higher BMI…is associated with increased mortality and increased risk for coronary heart disease, osteoarthritis, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and certain types of cancer. Even modest weight reductions can have substantial lifetime health benefits” (Sturm, 245). Obviously if someone is morbidly obese, he or she is at extreme risk for a myriad of

This would in turn effect Famous Brands negativley as Famous Brands will now have to pay a higher tax on sugary products in order to buy them forcing them to raise the costs of their end products sold to consumers meaning that the end products that consumers are now buying are going to be more expensive and taking away a competitive advantage from Famous Brands as they now have higher product prices making it easier for competitors to compete against

Obesity, diabetes, and heart disease, these are just some of the things sugary drinks can do to your body and I think that a tax will decrease some of those problems. So therefore the tax on sugary drinks should be enforced. For example, the tax should be pressed is that it will discourage people to buy sugary drinks is because it can lead to obesity and other health problems.

“Sin” taxes have been proven as a way to curtail known unhealthy behaviors. Soda taxes are most accepted if taxes collected are earmarked for health specific programs (Chaufin et al., 2010). The cons are the consumers are the voters and taxing may equate to loss of votes, taxing may not be equitable to individuals that do not have the disease, and finally, an undue burden may be placed on lower socio-economic demographics as these groups often have limited access to food vendors that primarily sale what would be considered taxed foods. Though these sin taxes are proven to work well with tobacco and alcohol consumption, altering a persons’ diet needs to be more individualized and realistically approached. Lower socio-economic individuals should not feel added burden as a tax; which would be a negative impact (Kuchar et al., 2005). Legality issues are regarded as low, but would require state government support to enact. This would likely not be popularly accepted and have a minimal impact for any increase in tax rate.

Considering that soft drinks are one of the most popular drinks to a lot of people all around the world, unfortunately, a lot of them love to drink it almost every day and may not live without it. Soda becomes addictive, preventing one from drinking what the body needs the most which is water. In the market, there is a infinite amount of choices with multiple varieties of flavors, different tastes, ranges from classic soda to diet soda. However, consumers do not recognize clearly the negative effect of soft drinks that have a high chance of eroding their health away. Some of these examples include dental erosion, energy intake, obesity and other health issues. Nowadays, people live a healthy life to avoid health problems, so taxes on soft