The World Health Organization is now urging all countries to introduce a sugar tax on soft drinks in an attempt to curb the soaring rate of obesity, especially in children. The WHO's advice comes as more and more countries are considering measures to dissuade people from buying the large quantities of colas, lemonades and other sugary soft drinks that have been identified as a major cause of the global overweight and obesity crisis. Similar taxes have worked in five other countries, with some methods reducing the consumption of fizzy drinks by up to one quarter. On the surface, the tax has merit. Higher prices reduce consumption. A WHO report says that a tax of 20 percent or more results in a drop in sales and consumption of sugary drinks. People consume fewer sugars such as fructose and glucose, take in fewer calories and reduce their risk of diabetes. The WHO has already published nutritional advice saying that people do not need sugar in their diet. Its guidance says we should restrict our intake of free sugars to a maximum of 10 percent of our energy needs, and preferably five percent. That's about 25 grams - around six teaspoons - for an adult of normal weight every day. To put this in context, a typical can of fizzy drink contains about nine teaspoons of sugar. People could eat more whole fruit instead of drinking lots of fruit juice, or cut down on sugar added to cups of tea. And governments could subsidize fresh fruit and vegetables. It may also be worth checking the ingredient lists for foods that do not obviously have sugar in them. Added sugar may be present in food we wouldn't expect to find it in. It is not always easy to spot how much sugar is in manufactured food. Sometimes it is hard to tell how much sugar is added to a product and how much sugar is intrinsic to its natural ingredients. Clearer labeling could offset that problem. If governments tax products like sugary drinks, they can reduce suffering and save lives. They can also cut healthcare costs and increase revenues to invest in health services. However, some reject a tax on sugary drinks, saying that previous tax attempts in the EU did not achieve the desired results, and were instead very costly to implement and manage. Obesity is a complex problem that perhaps cannot be stopped entirely by a tax on a single product category. Soft drinks account for only a small part of the daily caloric intake as the sector offers consumers a wide range of options, both with and without sugar. Thus, taking action on soft drinks alone might be irrelevant. What could be needed instead is a holistic approach. People have to be persuaded to pursue a healthy lifestyle rather than forcing them to change their habits through taxes. Still, a tax would have the most impact on the young, those on low incomes and others who consume a lot of sugary drinks. It will have the greatest positive effect on the health of those groups. Today's children and teenagers are consuming three times the recommended level of sugar while adults fare almost as badly. Consequent obesity is a major contributor to diabetes, heart disease and other preventable health problems that kill millions of people every year – and the problem is getting worse, particularly in developing countries and among children. Parents don't need studies to tell them that newborns have a sweet tooth, a distinct preference for sweet flavors over other flavors, while children enjoy sugary foods far more than adults. Healthcare professionals now recommend that parents avoid giving babies sweet things to eat or drink to try to stop them developing a preference for them early in life. What is most needed is a plan, and a tax on soft drinks is as good as any.
