Obesity doctors urged to back off soda tax

The annual gathering of the Obesity Society is underway this week in Washington, D.C., and that means the debate over taxes on sodas and other junk food is back on center stage.

A number of health organizations support a soda or junk food tax  -- raising the price on high-calorie, nonnutritious products -- to discourage people from buying them, as was reported here in Booster Shots last month. On Monday, however, the Obesity Society meeting was barely underway when the group Center for Consumer Freedom issued a statement urging health experts to view the obesity epidemic as an issue of personal responsibility that does not require government action.

In case you have forgotten, 33.3% of men and 35.3% of women are obese, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The statement from J. Justin Wilson, of the Center for Consumer Freedom, said: "The public health community seems dead-set on ever more regulation of our lives. The push for taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages is just the latest example of the disdainful belief that when it comes to matters of personal choices, the regulators know best. Government taxation should not be a tool for social engineering. Nor should it be used to penalize individuals for their personal food choices."

Social engineering?

Leaders of the Obesity Society, meanwhile, believe that having 72 million Americans overweight or obese with an associated $140 billion a year in extra medical costs requires some action beyond personal choice. The society's position statement on the epidemic does not mention a soda tax, but it addresses the issue of personal responsibility, saying obesity is not a character flaw but a complex disease involving genes, behavior and environment.

"While personal willpower and healthy lifestyle choices are part of the solution, a lack of willpower is not the cause, and personal responsibility alone is not enough to solve the problem," they say.

We'll have more news from the Obesity Society in Booster Shots this week.

-- Shari Roan

Photo credit: David McNew / Getty Images

Photo: Obesity prevalence among adults by state. Credit: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Comments

[Dan]

I am tired of the garbage the food industry is spewing to save their profits. Type 2 diabetes is a lifestyle related disease and excessive sugar intake IS part the cause. It is a major contributor to the out of control health care costs. Heath care costs for diabetes is 250 BILLION dollars a year and everyone who pays taxes or insurance premiums has to pay part of that bill. The tax may not slow the consumption of junk food much, but it sure will help pay the medical bills produced by people who don't take care of themselves. I am for taxing everything that is a part of unhealthy lifestyles that contribute to disease, not just cigarettes and alcohol. A small tax on the array of unhealthy items won't have a significant effect on the pocketbooks of people who are responsible about what they eat and will reduce health care costs for people with healthy diets.

[Debbie Pias]

Of COURSE the government should tax unhealthy food. If people want it bad enough, they'll pay for it. People should be able to choose, but let's be honest. Most people who want to lose weight don't want to put in the effort it takes. They don't want to eat healthy and they certainly don't want to get off their asses.
So, even though the evidence is so ridiculously obvious that "hey, maybe I should put down this king size Butterfinger bar and eat, oh I dunno....an apple," people are not going to do this. The endless studies of chronic illness related to obesity aren't enough for people to stop their habits. So, hit em where it counts. The whole world is motivated by money.

It worked for many MANY smokers....keep the taxes coming and then maybe people will consume unhealthy snack foods like they're SUPPOSED to be consumed: in moderation.