Fact-Checking Myths from the Sugar Industry
Call for Political Commitment to a Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax
Advertisement
The Federal Cabinet has come out in favor of the sugar-sweetened beverage tax, but the Bundestag has yet to make a decision. According to recent media reports, the tax’s fate hangs in the balance. Yet scientific and medical organizations have been emphasizing for many years: The sugar-sweetened beverage tax can help prevent obesity and diabetes and curb the rise in healthcare costs. Ahead of the decisive deliberations in the Bundestag, the sugar industry is using misleading arguments to question the effectiveness of the sugar-sweetened beverage tax.
A scientific statement published today scrutinizes the sugar industry’s arguments and highlights where they are misleading.
Myth: Body weight is determined solely by calorie balance, not by sugar. Fact: Sugary drinks increase calorie intake and thus body weight.
Myth: The sugar tax does not help combat overweight and obesity. Fact: Extensive evidence supports the effectiveness of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes.
Myth: The sugar tax costs jobs. Fact: Independent studies provide no evidence of job losses. The economy also benefits from lower healthcare costs.
Myth: The sugar tax is a bureaucratic monster. Fact: The estimated administrative burden of the sugar-sweetened beverage tax is on a similar scale to that of other taxes.
This position paper examines nine common arguments put forward by the food and beverage industry and counters them with evidence-based facts, experiences from other countries, and scientific analysis.
“The sugar and food lobby is throwing up one smokescreen after another. Instead of engaging with the scientific facts, they divert attention, ignore the evidence, and stoke fears that are easy to generate. Anyone who examines the industry’s arguments more closely will quickly realize: Much of it does not stand up to fact-checking. Policymakers should not be misled. Better health and lower healthcare costs benefit everyone, including the economy,” says Barbara Bitzer, spokesperson for the DANK Science Alliance and executive director of the German Diabetes Society (DDG), commenting on the industry’s argumentation strategy.
Prof. Dr. med. Peter von Philipsborn, lead author of the statement and head of the Chair of Public Health Nutrition at the University of Bayreuth, adds: “Sugar-sweetened beverages increase the risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular diseases. A comprehensive strategy is needed to prevent these diseases. The sugar-sweetened beverage tax is not a panacea, but it is a key component in the fight against diet-related diseases and an important step toward an effective prevention policy.”
The sugar-sweetened beverage tax is scheduled to be debated in the German Bundestag in November. In the run-up to the debate, discussions have intensified regarding the tax’s effectiveness and its intended incentive effect. “Personal responsibility requires framework conditions that make healthier choices easier, regardless of educational background or income. Politicians can create precisely these framework conditions now,” concludes prevention expert Bitzer.
Note: This article has been translated using a computer system without human intervention. LUMITOS offers these automatic translations to present a wider range of current news. Since this article has been translated with automatic translation, it is possible that it contains errors in vocabulary, syntax or grammar. The original article in German can be found here.
Original publication
Other news from the department politics & laws
