It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ban trans fats, tax junk food to stop obesity: medical journal

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Ban trans fats, tax junk food to stop obesity: medical journal


healthzone


Canadian governments need to take drastic steps to address the country’s obesity epidemic, such as taxing junk food and banning or capping some ingredients, says an article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.vancouversun.com

www.eurekalert.org
edit on 26-4-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Here is the Report that the articles are referencing.

Written by: (Canadian Medical Association Journal)


A junk-food tax, or "sin" tax, could help reduce the consumption of high-fat foods and drinks, said Sonia Grandi, co-author of the editorial and Cardiology and Clinical Epidemiology researcher at the Jewish General Hospital in Montreal.


I really don't see it working. And, just because the CMAJ is calling for it, it doesn't mean it will happen. But this is the first steps into legislative change.

It reminds me of the current blackmarket cigarette debacle. Raise taxes on something to unreasonable levels: create a blackmarket.

So what kind of fines would there be for a ten year old caught selling unregulated chocolate at school?



edit on 26-4-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
I believe the main reason they don't put high taxes of "junk food" is that a lot of it is consumed by the poor who can only afford things such as bleached white bread, those dollar boxes of Little Debbie cakes, Generic Sodas (those sodas are cheaper than bottled water in most stores.), etc...

If those were to be taxed, you know there will be a big protest against it.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
You are a fool if you think this is to stop obesity. It is nothing but an excuse for more cash... The only reason for taxation is greed, every other reason is simply an excuse to dupe the sheep. You are being robbed and you like it, because it makes you feel damn good to be such a good supportive citizen doesn't it? Open your eyes, the only thing taxation supports is a bloated government and the politicians wallets. We are being taxed enough god damn it. It is time to draw a line in the sand. No more taxation, PERIOD. Any new measure to tax us further should be met with non violent, yet harsh resistance.


edit on 26-4-2011 by sliceNodice because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
I don't know how it is in Canada, but in American money plays a part. It isn't just junk food. It's economics.

You have 10.00 to spend on food.

You have to feed five people for two or three days.

A box of Mac and Cheese is fifty cents. Top Ramen is even cheaper. Fresh vegetables are upwards of $3 a pound. Meats are almost untouchable. Whole grain bread is almost $4 where as white bread is around $1.50-$2.00. The bottom line is processed foods are cheap and good food is getting more and more unaffordable.

What do you buy? Most would go for the most filling option, which is the super processed foods that are high in fat, sodium and carbohydrates. It's not cheap to eat healthy. It's actually cheaper to eat from the $1 menu at a fast food restaurant now than it is to buy even quasi-healthy food from a grocery store.

Taxing won't work either. Our tobacco and gasoline taxes are very high here. People still smoke and drive. Maybe subsidizing farms that grow good food instead of doling out millions to farmers to grow corn will drive prices for good food down. I don't know.

edit on 26-4-2011 by tncryptogal because: typo



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


Here is some hypocrisy found in the paper:

The rationale stems from the success of cigarette taxes, a proven and effective intervention to combat smoking. 17 However, it remains unclear whether a junk food tax is feasible or appropriate. 13 Proponents of a dedicated junk food tax suggest that the large revenues generated could be used to subsidize healthy food prices or to fund obesity prevention programs. 6,13
1

So the paper claims that the anti-smoking initiatives have worked, but then we have the following:



Ontario's proposed changes to laws surrounding illegal cigarettes are a step in the right direction, but the province needs to focus on manufacturers to really curb smuggling, anti-smoking groups said Thursday.

The new legislation tabled Thursday proposes that people found carrying small quantities of illegal cigarettes pay fines between $100 and $500. Someone caught with less than 200 illegal smokes would have to pay a total of about $175 in fees and taxes
1



Curbing contraband tobacco is a key component to reducing smoking. Illegal cigarettes account for more than 40 per cent of those smoked by high schoolers, according to one study. Not only does contraband feed criminal enterprise, but cheap cigarettes undermine one of the best tools the government has to keep young people from picking up the habit: price.
1

I would like to know if smoking actually has gone down, or is it they just account for it now because of the blackmarket trade?



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by sliceNodice
You are a fool if you think this is to stop obesity. It is nothing but an excuse for more cash... The only reason for taxation is greed, every other reason is simply an excuse to dupe the sheep. You are being robbed and you like it, because it makes you feel damn good to be such a good supportive citizen doesn't it? Open your eyes, the only thing taxation supports is a bloated government and the politicians wallets. We are being taxed enough god damn it. It is time to draw a line in the sand. No more taxation, PERIOD. Any new measure to tax us further should be met with non violent, yet harsh resistance.


edit on 26-4-2011 by sliceNodice because: (no reason given)



Good god man, who in the heck are you replying to? No one justified the government's position or the position of the medical journal in this thread, as of your post.

My mistake if you are just speaking generally to anyone who believes in this:


edit on 26-4-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by CalmAsHinduCows
I believe the main reason they don't put high taxes of "junk food" is that a lot of it is consumed by the poor who can only afford things such as bleached white bread, those dollar boxes of Little Debbie cakes, Generic Sodas (those sodas are cheaper than bottled water in most stores.), etc...

If those were to be taxed, you know there will be a big protest against it.


The poor can buy just about what ever they want with the free hand out from us, the tax payer.

This is about education and it starts with helping people to understand that 70% of the "fresh" food they buy is genetically modified not for taste and health, but rather for yield and shelf life.

Once people understand that they are putting something in their body that was not designed in their best interest or their childrens best interest, they might, just maybe wake to the fact that they dont need the hand outs

Educating the population that they can grow their own fruits and vegatables in their backyards even with very little space you can feed a family of 4 with less money than the taxpayer gives them every month.

High Fructose Corn Syrup is the DEVIL...ask any chef in America nad I would wager that 80% will be disgusted by thought of using HFCS in anything.

Im all for taxing this garbage. If it says HFCS onthe label, it should be treated like nicotine porducts becuase it seems to be just as addictive.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
We could just do the far simpler (and far cheaper) method.

Re-enstate phys-ed in schools and keep it as a priority.

Bring back health education. Once upon a time health education actually disccused total health and well being...including proper eating...now a days it is called sex-ed and we know what it is about (how they can't seem to teach kids about sex in 8 years never ceases to amaze me). Btw, health education did cover sexual education, just so you don't think I am trying to get rid of it.

Start teaching children right from the start how easy it is to live a healthy lifestyle and we will see major change within a generation.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Has taxing cigarettes worked?



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
And here I thought Judge Dred was just a fictional movie...



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


If there is ever a ban on chocolate,coffee and sugar...
Mama will go to war! These are the bare essentials
of survival besides alcohol and tobacco.
You never want to come between a woman and her
chocolate



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Why just kill people when you can make a profit as well?
That is what this is about.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


It won't work because it is the wrong approach Some humans do well on a diet that is carb heavy some don't. But heart disease, diabetes, and obesity are not caused by "trans fats" and junk food. It is carbs. Carbs create the fat in the bloodstream, and in the body.

Of course if you eat high carb, high fat you will have lipid troubles. However, take away the carbs and you will find that the body is highly efficient at regulating body weight and blood cholesterol levels.

Instead of making laws and banning things that free people want, you should educate so that when people reach for a soda, they are informed.

You want to make people thinner? Reduce raw milk, rice, wheat, potato, and sugar. And never forget barley, at over 50 carbs per serving (my body maintains health at 35-40 per day...i am carb intolerant).

This crap of trying to make people stay below a certain calorie count, ignoring the source of those calories altogether, is the driving force of the obesity epidemic A low glycemic diet will more effectively balance weight, blood sugar, and blood cholesterol. Cutting calories from fat is more like brute forcing the body into condition, where cutting calories from carbs allows the body chemistry to do all the work.



posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   
People eat junk because it is cheaper.

If you make junk more expensive than healthier foods, most people will eat healthier.

Though the withdrawal will be awful.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 12:19 AM
link   
Hey, I've got a great idea; why don't we just make it illegal for companies to put anything in food that's not food. That'd solve all the problems right there. But I guess that will never happen because of the whores at the FDA and USDA. WHORES ALL!!!!! Whew! That felt good to say.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join