Missing the obvious

 


Published/Last Modified on Saturday, October 17, 2009 8:53 PM MDT

The numbers are in and body-size bigots are not happy. According to reports on a soon-to-be released study, slapping a sin tax on soda pop has done exactly bupkis in reducing the girth of the nation.

The 16-year study, to be printed in the journal, "Contemporary Economic Policy," looked at soft-drink taxation and how it impacted body mass index. The BMI is a crude and imperfect assessment, based on height and weight, which many have been convinced is the be all, end all when it comes to health, insurability and an individual's worthiness as a human being.

The study reportedly finds that a 1-percent tax increase on fizzy drinks equates to a BMI decrease of 0.003 points and that overall, such taxes had only a tiny impact on obesity.

Advertisement
Predictably, the response as of Friday was the broad hint that states should increase taxes on soda.

"Our results leave open the possibility that large taxes that are communicated to consumers are still worthwhile to consider as policy options, but small tax changes will not work," study author Jason Fletcher said in a news release.

Such statements miss the obvious: The reason soda taxes don't have the net result of whittling our waists is because soda has little to do with the size of our waists in the first place.

Increasing soda taxes might have the effect of reducing soda consumption — which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, given that pop rots teeth, leaches bones, and gives people of every size an unnecessary sugar zap — but it will not make a fat person thin.

Sin taxes should only be discussed (but not necessarily imposed) in the context of issues that are truly moral issues. Body size isn't a moral issue. It is the result of primarily genetic influences, and the way any given body is able to process simple carbohydrates like sugary cola.

While we would all be better off drinking less soda, government dictums about what to consume — whether in the form of a direct ban on a food or drink, or a backdoor discouragement like a greater tax — should be nipped in the bud.

 
 

¤ Please read our Disclaimer and Privacy Policy before participating in our online community.

Comments

    anti pc wrote on Oct 24, 2009 2:21 PM:

    " Sorry to tell you but people are NOT dieing in the streets right now. While I believe there is certainly room for improvement within our healthcare system more Government run healthcare is not the answer. They are having a hard enough time running Medicare, Medicaid, the V.A. ect. How about fixing those first and then see where we need to go from there. "

    Disagree wrote on Oct 24, 2009 10:34 AM:

    " People would not spend "the money" on health care. They'd spend it on cell phones, flat screen TV's, and other non-essentials. Those that would then have no money for healthcare...what would we do? Let them die in the streets? As far as the deficit goes, i couldn't look my child in the face for the last 8 years while the deficit was climbing then as well. It's not new with this admin, just continuing. Try to see things with a non-partisan view occassionally. "

    well wrote on Oct 23, 2009 11:11 AM:

    " I for one don't drink soda but I know a few people that do. Doesn't do a darn thing for losing weight. I'm really tired of the government telling me what is good for me. I'm an adult and I do know right from wrong. Give the American people the money for Health Care and two to one, we will spend it the way it's suppose to be. Quit printing money that is worthless!. The first bailout could of been sent to the people, it is after all our money! God Bless the Old America! "

    fuzzhead wrote on Oct 22, 2009 10:24 AM:

    " Right on "what if". This so called sin tax has nothing to do obeisity and everything to do with this administrations tax and spend policy. These sin taxes hurt the ones who can least afford it. Just wait and see what the taxes are when Obama Care and Cap and Tax are passed. I don't see how any liberal can look his son, daughter, or grandchild in the face knowing what they're leaving them to pay for in their lifetime. "

    WHAT IF wrote on Oct 20, 2009 8:08 PM:

    " the govt should slap a sin tax on lying, 80% of this country would be broke and taxed to death, but all of our problems would be solved. "

    anti pc wrote on Oct 20, 2009 6:21 PM:

    " You are right pe teacher... The only way it works. "

    pe teacher wrote on Oct 20, 2009 12:15 PM:

    " four words for weight loss
    Eat Less, Exercise More ! "

    Mr. Obvious wrote on Oct 18, 2009 11:36 PM:

    " You don't get to be plus sized unless you consume many more calories than you expend - over a long period of time. You don't lose your plus size status unless you expend many more calories than you consume - over a long period of time. It's just that simple.

    However, if you want to be plus size, it is none of the government's business. If you think "they" are trying to run your life now, just wait until "they" are paying for your health care. It's going to get far worse. "

    Dr. Tom wrote on Oct 18, 2009 11:27 PM:

    " You hit the nail on the head. Let's just change a couple words, and maybe you'll "get it" on another subject.

    The obvious: The reason higher carbon dioxide levels don't have the net result of increasing global warming is because incremental CO2 has little to do with global warming in the first place.

    I sure miss all those hurricanes the global warming alarmists predicted - but they just don't seem to be happening. Oh my. "

    Eileen wrote on Oct 18, 2009 9:42 AM:

    " I am a plus sized woman in overall good heath. I stopped drinking soda years ago and doing so had absolutely NO impact on my weight. I have also cut out fast food, drink more water, exercise more (albeit still not enough) and have finally come to the realization that some people are just large. Leave us the heck alone. "

    George Garrette wrote on Oct 18, 2009 8:22 AM:

    " SIN TAX???
    What ever happened to the separation of church and state? Whenever our government (or should I say THE government) wants extra tax money, for liquor or cigarettes they call it a SIN TAX. Now a sin tax on soda. If THE Government would quit trying to dictate to the world on what they can and can not do they could do or not do they could lower the taxes. Thats where most of our tax money is for. "


Post a comment


READER COMMENTS 

• Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.

• Be relevant. Keep your comments on point. 

• See the guidelines for TalkAbout. Perhaps your comment is best for that community forum, available from the home page, instead of commenting on a particular story.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. Montrose Press is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in montrosepress.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the Montrose Press. Montrose Press does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized Montrose Press spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!

(optional)