DOCSLIB.ORG

Predicting*The*Potential*Health*And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Predicting*The*Potential*Health*And ! ! ! Predicting*the*potential*health*and*economic* impact*of*a*sugary*drink*tax*in*Canada:** a*modelling*study* ! ! ! ! ! by! ! Amanda!Clarisse!Jones! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! A!thesis! presented!to!the!University!of!Waterloo! in!fulfilment!of!the! thesis!requirement!for!the!degree!of! Doctor!of!Philosophy!! in! Public!Health!and!Health!Systems! ! ! ! ! ! Waterloo,!Ontario,!Canada,!2018! ©!Amanda!Clarisse!Jones!2018! ! EXAMINING*COMMITTEE*MEMBERSHIP* The!following!served!on!the!Examining!Committee!for!this!thesis.!The!decision!of!the!Examining! Committee!is!by!majority!vote.! ! External!Examiner! ! ! ! DR.!KATERINA!MAXIMOVA! ! ! ! ! ! ! Assistant!Professor! ! Supervisor! ! ! ! ! DR.!DAVID!HAMMOND! ! ! ! ! ! ! Professor! ! Internal!Member! ! ! ! DR.!SUSAN!HORTON! ! ! ! ! ! ! Professor! ! Internal!Member! ! ! ! DR.!SHARON!KIRKPATRICK! ! ! ! ! ! ! Assistant!Professor! ! InternalTexternal!Member! ! ! DR.!GORETTY!DIAS! ! ! ! ! ! ! Assistant!Professor! ! * ii! ! AUTHOR’S*DECLARATION* I!hereby!declare!that!I!am!the!sole!author!of!this!thesis.!This!is!a!true!copy!of!the!thesis,!including! any!required!final!revisions,!as!accepted!by!my!examiners.! ! I!understand!that!my!thesis!may!be!made!electronically!available!to!the!public.! * iii! ! ABSTRACT* * BACKGROUND* Consistent!with!global!trends,!high!body!mass!index!(BMI)!and!high!blood!glucose!have!risen!at! rapid!rates!among!Canadians.!The!consumption!of!sugarTsweetened!beverages!(SSBs)!is!a!wellT established!and!important!dietary!risk!factor!for!these!conditions.!A!growing!body!of!research! suggests!that!SSB!taxes!can!achieve!meaningful!health!impacts!by!shifting!dietary!preferences.! However,!there!are!several!key!literature!gaps,!including!no!estimations!of!the!potential!benefit! of!taxing!‘sugary!drinks’,!a!beverage!category!that!includes!both!SSBs!and!100%!juice,!which!is! high!in!sugar.!In!addition,!no!published!studies!have!simulated!a!tax!on!SSBs!or!sugary!drinks!for! the!Canadian!population.! ! PURPOSE* The!proposed!study’s!objectives!were:!1)!to!investigate!Canadians’!consumption!of!sugary!drink! types,!and!differences!by!socioTeconomic!characteristics;!and!2)!to!estimate!the!potential!impact! among!the!Canadian!population!of!a!simulated!national!tax!on!SSBs!and!a!simulated!tax!on! sugary!drinks.! ! METHODS* The!study!was!conducted!in!two!components.!First,!sugary!drink!intake!(volume!and!energy)!was! estimated!using!24Thour!dietary!recall!data!from!the!2015!Canadian!Community!Health!Survey!–! Nutrition!(respondents!ages!>1!year;!final!sample!N=20,176).!For!100%!juice!and!‘total!SSBs’! (which!included!15!beverage!types),!intake!was!reported!overall!and!by!socioTeconomic! measures:!sex,!age,!ethnicity,!income,!province,!and!BMI!category.!Student’s!tTtest!and!Wald!FT test!tested!for!differences!among!population!subTgroups.!SSB!and!sugary!drink!intakes!were!also! estimated!for!inclusion!in!the!study’s!second!component:!a!simulation!of!a!sugary!drink!tax.!The! impact!of!the!tax!intervention!was!estimated!using!a!proportional!multiTstate!life!tableTbased! Markov!model!adapted!to!simulate!the!2015!Canadian!adult!population.!The!model!applied!10%,! 20%,!and!30%!ad!valorem!taxes!on!SSBs!and!sugary!drinks,!and!compared!two!populations:!one! with!a!tax!intervention!and!one!without!a!tax!intervention.!The!model!simulated!the!effect!of! iv! ! energy!intake!from!beverages!on!19!diseases!mediated!by!body!mass,!and!the!direct!effects!of! intake!on!type!2!diabetes,!accounting!for!beverage!substitution.!Sensitivity!analyses!examined! key!assumptions!and!Monte!Carlo!simulation!assessed!uncertainty.! ! RESULTS* A!large!proportion!of!respondents!reported!consuming!100%!juice!(children,!39.3%;!adults! 22.8%)!or!some!type!of!SSB!(children,!53.0%;!adults,!40.8%)!during!the!previous!24Thour!period.! In!2015,!each!Canadian!consumed!an!average!of!74.3!ml!(33.7!kcal)!of!100%!juice!and!203.6!ml! (98.7!kcal)!of!SSBs!per!day.!100%!juice!was!consumed!more!than!any!other!sugary!drink,! followed!closely!by!regular!carbonated!soft!drinks.!Compared!to!females,!males’!consumption! was!significantly!higher!for!100%!juice!(37%!greater!volume)!and!total!SSBs!(54%!greater).! Children!consumed!more!sugary!drinks!on!average!each!day!than!adults:!nearly!double!the! volume!of!100%!juice!(86%!more)!and!14%!more!SSBs.!Beverage!intake!differed!by!ethnicity,! province,!and!BMI!category,!but!not!by!income!quintile.!For!the!simulated!taxes,!there!were! sizeable!differences!in!the!impacts!of!a!SSB!tax!versus!sugary!drinks!tax:!prevalence!of! overweight/obesity!changed!from!63.3%!to!61.7%!vs!61.0%;!type!2!diabetes!incidence!rate! decreased!by!T5.9%!vs!T7.4%.!Over!a!25Tyear!period,!compared!to!a!SSB!tax,!a!sugary!drinks!tax! produced!47%!more!averted!disabilityTadjusted!life!years!(DAlYs;!314,326!versus!460,812),!45%! greater!health!care!costs!savings!($7.5!billion!vs!$10.9!billion!Canadian!dollars),!and!37%!more! annual!tax!revenue!($1.0!billion!CAD!vs!$1.4!billion!CAD).! ! CONCLUSIONS* Consumption!of!sugary!drinks!remains!an!important!disease!risk!factor!among!the!Canadian! population.!Average!intake!of!sugary!drinks!in!2015!is!lower!than!2004!estimates,!but!remains! high,!especially!among!children!and!youth.!The!current!study!suggests!that!a!beverage!tax!in! Canada!has!the!potential!to!substantially!reduce!the!health!burden!while!generating!health!care! savings!and!tax!revenue,!especially!if!100%!juice!is!among!taxed!beverages.!Given!Canadians’! high!100%!juice!consumption,!the!mounting!evidence!on!adverse!effects!associated!with!free! sugar!consumption,!and!the!role!of!100%!juice!as!a!substitute!beverage!to!SSBs,!there!is!a!strong! rationale!for!its!inclusion!as!a!taxed!beverage.!Future!studies!could!examine!the!potential!impact! v! ! of!a!‘tiered’!tax!based!on!beverage!sugar!content,!as!well!as!the!effects!of!a!tax!relative!to!other! nutrition!interventions.! ! * vi! ! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS* Funding!for!this!study!was!provided!by!a!Canadian!Institutes!of!Health!Research!(CIHR)!Operating! Grant.!The!pilot!study!was!funded!by!the!Canadian!Cancer!Society,!Diabetes!Canada,!the! Childhood!Obesity!Foundation,!the!Chronic!Disease!Prevention!Alliance!of!Canada,!and!the!Heart! &!Stroke!Foundation.!Additional!stipend!support!was!provided!through!Ontario!Graduate! Scholarship,!University!of!Waterloo!President’s!Graduate!Scholarship,!Cancer!Care!Ontario,!and! the!CIHR!Training!Grant!in!Population!Intervention!for!Chronic!Disease!Prevention:!A!PanT Canadian!Program![grant!number!53893].! ! “Doing!a!PhD!is!an!exercise!in!resilience,”!a!wise!mentor!remarked!as!I!was!weighing!whether!or! not!to!apply!to!PhD!programs.!How!true!these!words!have!been.!I!feel!grateful!to!be!at!the!finish! line!of!this!marathon,!and!cannot!imagine!making!it!here!without!the!support!of!so!many!people.!! ! To!my!PhD!committee!members,!thank!you!for!your!contribution!to!this!research!and!my! professional!growth.!Dr.!Susan!Horton!and!Dr.!Sharon!Kirkpatrick,!your!expertise!has!improved! this!project,!as!well!as!challenged!and!inspired!me.!! ! I!will!be!forever!thankful!to!Dr.!David!Hammond,!my!PhD!supervisor,!for!sending!me!that!email! on!April!2,!2013!with!an!invitation!to!take!me!on!as!a!PhD!student.!I!had!a!long!wish!list!for!a! future!supervisor.!You!checked!every!box!and!more.!You!are!an!exceptional!role!model!as!a! professional!and!a!person—one!who!is!both!brilliant!and!caring.!It!has!been!an!honour!working! with!you.!! ! To!the!past!and!present!Hammond!lab!students!and!staff,!working!with!a!group!like!you!was!also! on!my!wish!list.!Your!insights,!comradery,!and!friendship!have!added!colour!and!life!to!my!time! here.!You!will!be!missed.! ! This!study!would!have!been!impossible!without!Dr.!lennert!Veerman,!who!so!generously!shared! his!time!and!coached!me!through!the!simulation!modelling!work.!I!look!forward!to!when!we! meet!in!person,!not!just!over!Skype.!Dr.!Pat!NewcombeTWelch!was!instrumental!in!accessing! Canadian!data!sources!from!the!SouthTWestern!Ontario!Research!Data!Centre.!Thank!you!for! your!expertise,!patience,!and!friendship.!Thank!you!to!the!many!employees!of!Statistics!Canada,! Health!Canada,!and!Public!Health!Agency!of!Canada!who!responded!to!the!dozens!of!emails!and! phone!calls!that!I!made!while!tracking!down!data!sources!for!this!project.!! ! Thank!you!to!the!many!friends!and!family!who!offered!love!and!encouragement!throughout!this! journey.!Christine!Richard,!your!Zumba!class!did!more!for!me!than!any!PhD!class!and!kept!me! sane.!Darryl!Gingerich,!you!are!a!friend!for!life.!Vanessa!Mio,!what!a!treasure!you!are.!You!came! into!my!life!when!I!most!needed!a!kindred!spirit.!! ! To!my!parents,!Tony!and!Sylvia!Jones.!I!love!and!honour!you.!God!knew!that!doing!this!PhD! would!bring!us!closer!together.!I!see!more!than!ever!the!love!you!have!for!me,!the!sacrifices! you’ve!made,!and!depth!of!your!character.!I!am!blessed.!Thank!you.! ! vii! ! TABLE*OF*CONTENTS! EXAMINING!COMMITTEE!MEMBERSHIP!............................................................................................!ii! AUTHOR’S!DECLARATION!..................................................................................................................!iii! ABSTRACT!...........................................................................................................................................!iv! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS!....................................................................................................................!vii! TABlE!OF!CONTENTS!.......................................................................................................................!viii!
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SHOULD WE TAX UNHEALTHY FOODS and DRINKS? Donald Marron, Maeve Gearing, and John Iselin December 2015
    SHOULD WE TAX UNHEALTHY FOODS AND DRINKS? Donald Marron, Maeve Gearing, and John Iselin December 2015 Donald Marron is director of economic policy initiatives and Institute fellow at the Urban Institute, Maeve Gearing is a research associate at the Urban Institute, and John Iselin is a research assistant at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The authors thank Laudan Aron, Kyle Caswell, Philip Cook, Stan Dorn, Lisa Dubay, William Gale, Genevieve Kenney, Adele Morris, Eric Toder, and Elaine Waxman for helpful comments and conversations; Joseph Rosenberg for running the Tax Policy Center model; Cindy Zheng for research assistance; Elizabeth Forney for editing; and Joanna Teitelbaum for formatting. This report was funded by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation. We thank our funders, who make it possible for Urban to advance its mission. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to our funders, the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, the Urban Institute, or its trustees. Funders do not determine our research findings or the insights and recommendations of our experts. For more information on our funding principles, go to urban.org/support. TAX POLICY CENTER | URBAN INSTITUTE & BROOKINGS INSTITUTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A healthy diet is essential to a long and vibrant life. But there is increasing evidence that our diets are not as healthy as we would like. Obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and other conditions linked to what we eat and drink are major challenges globally. By some estimates, obesity alone may be responsible for almost 3 million deaths each year and some $2 trillion in medical costs and lost productivity (Dobbs et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Beverage Policies & Drinks with Artificial Sweeteners
    HEALTHY April 2020 HEALTHCARE TOOLKIT BEVERAGE POLICIES & DRINKS WITH ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS Hospitals implementing beverage policies are replacing sugary drinks1 with healthier beverage options in their vending machines, soda fountains, catering services and other food services. These institutions are quickly faced with questions about whether to include artificially sweetened beverages. Plain water and unsweetened low-fat or nonfat milk are still the healthiest replacements for sugary drinks, and unsweetened coffee, tea, and sparkling waters also rank high as healthier beverage options. But many artificially sweetened beverages are popular, and some national authorities recognize that artificially sweetened drinks can provide useful alternatives to sugary beverages for adults as a calorie reduction strategy (although consumption by children is not recommended).2 The Public Health Law Center and the American Cancer Society have partnered to develop resources to help organizations create healthier food environments, with a special focus on hospital and healthcare settings. This fact sheet, which is part of a larger toolkit, addresses some of the commonly asked questions about artificial sweeteners. www.publichealthlawcenter.org April 2020 While there can be positive calorie reduction benefits for adults in switching from sugary to artificially sweetened (or “diet”) beverages, a growing body of research suggests that a simple net calorie calculation may not tell the whole story. The potential weight loss and other health impacts of “diet” drink consumption appear to be more complex and warrant continued research. Because the research is inconclusive, many institutions choose to include “diet” drinks as replacements for sugary drinks with the rationale that they would like to offer the widest range of low- or no-calorie beverages as possible, and “diet” drinks are preferable to sugary beverages in terms of calorie and carbohydrate intake.
    [Show full text]
  • Could Your Diet Drink Be Making You Fat?
    Could Your Diet Drink Be Making You Fat? The food and beverage industry has a wide variety of low/no-calorie sweeteners to choose from to lower the sugar (and often calorie) content of some of our favorite, sweet foods and drinks. We, as individuals, have a variety of choices too – the “yellow packets”, the “blue packets”, the “pink packets”, stevia extract, monk fruit extract, and more. Generally speaking, people seem to be either “in favor” of using these sugar substitutes or “against” them, saying they are all just as bad (or worse) for you, than sugar. In actuality, each sugar substitute has its own unique chemical structure, and therefore may impact the body in distinctly different ways. While all sugar substitutes on the market are regulated by the FDA and are considered to be safe, they shouldn’t all be lumped together as “good” or “bad”. A recent study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition suggest that different sugar substitutes may have different effects on weight. The study compared 4 different sugar substitutes: saccharin (like in Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (like in Splenda), aspartame (like in Equal) and rebaudioside A (stevia extract, like in Truvia), to sucrose (table sugar), and was performed on 123 subjects that were overweight/obese and typically did not use sugar substitutes. For 12 weeks, the subjects were randomly assigned to drink 5 ¼ - 7 ½ cups daily of a colored, Kool-aid beverage sweetened with sugar or one of the 4 sugar substitutes mentioned above (heavier subjects drank a larger volume). The subjects were measured and weighed and their % body fat/body composition was assessed.
    [Show full text]
  • A Local Excise Tax on Sugary Drinks
    DENVER: Sugary Drink Excise Tax Executive Summary Continually rising rates of obesity represent one of the greatest public health threats facing the United States. Obesity has been linked to excess consumption of sugary drinks. Federal, state, and local governments have considered implementing excise taxes on sugary drinks to reduce consumption, reduce obesity and provide a new source of government revenue.1-4 We modeled implementation of a city excise tax, a tax on sugary drinks only, at a tax rate of $0.02/ ounce. The tax model was projected to be cost-saving and resulted in lower levels of sugary drink consumption, thousands of cases of obesity prevented, and hundreds of millions of dollars in health care cost savings. Health care cost savings per dollar invested was $11 in the model. Results prepared by Denver Public Health and the CHOICES Project team at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health: Moreland J, Kraus (McCormick) E, Long MW, Ward ZJ, Giles CM, Barrett JL, Cradock AL, Resch SC, Greatsinger A, Tao H, Flax CN, and Gortmaker SL. Funded by The JPB Foundation. Results are those of the authors and not the funders. For further information, contact cgiles@ hsph.harvard.edu and visit www.choicesproject.org The information in this report is intended to provide educational information on the cost-effectiveness of Sugary Drink Taxes. 1 DENVER: Sugary Drink Excise Tax Background Although sugary drink consumption has declined in recent years, adolescents and young adults in the United States consume more sugar than the Dietary Guidelines
    [Show full text]
  • A Legal & Practical Guide for Designing Sugary Drink Taxes
    A Legal and Practical Guide for Designing Sugary Drink Taxes Second Edition Cola SPORT ENERGY Contents Introduction 3 Why Tax Sugary Drinks? 5 Legal Authority 7 Preemption 8 Sugary Drink Tax Design 9 What Type of Tax to Pass 10 Defining the Tax Base 11 Which Beverages Are Subject to the Tax? 14 Setting the Tax Rate 16 Dedication of Revenues 17 Ballot Measure Versus Legislation 20 Implementing the Tax 21 Key Implementation Steps 21 Tax Education and Community Outreach Activities 22 Potential Challenges to Tax Efforts 23 Conclusion 25 Appendix I: Model Findings 26 Appendix II: Sample and Model Ordinance Language 31 Notes 36 TABLES Table 1: Sugary Drink Taxes in the United States as of November 30, 2018 6 Table 2: Comparing Sugary Drink Tax Bases 13 Table 3: Product Price Changes for Volume- and Sugar-Based Taxes 16 Table 4: Activities and Programs Funded by Sugary Drink Taxes 17 2 A Legal and Practical Guide for Designing Sugary Drink Taxes | changelabsolutions.org | healthyfoodamerica.org Introduction Sugary drinks are the number one source of added In the last few years, one strategy has received sugars in our diet, representing almost half of growing support from both the public and all added sugars consumed in the United States.1 policymakers: taxing sugary drinks to both reduce These added sugars are a major contributor to consumption and raise revenues that can be the country’s high rates of heart disease, type 2 invested in promoting healthier communities. diabetes, obesity, poor oral health, and other chronic Recently enacted sugary
    [Show full text]
  • A Critical Review Exploring Taxation on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages As a Strategy to Address Obesity in Canada
    Journal of the HEIA Vol. 26, No. 1, 2020 A critical review exploring taxation on sugar-sweetened beverages as a strategy to address obesity in Canada Alyssa Ramuscak This is the joint winning paper in the graduate category of the Dr Elisabeth Feniak Award for Excellence in Technical Writing 2019 presented by the Canadian Home Economics Foundation. Abstract such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes and Canada’s growing obesity epidemic has the certain cancers, and places individuals at a potential to threaten the sustainability of our greater risk of premature death (Niebylski et al., economy and healthcare system (Niebylski et al., 2015; PHAC & CIHI, 2011). In 2008, obesity 2015). Currently, one in four Canadian adults are cost the Canadian economy $4.6 billion and this obese, placing them at a higher risk of chronic cost is projected to continue to grow (PHAC & diseases and premature death (Navaneelan & CIHI, 2011). If no proactive measures are taken Janz, 2014). To address this growing issue, to address the obesity epidemic, obesity has the the World Health Organization (WHO) potential to threaten global economies and the recommends using national-level strategies to sustainability of healthcare systems (Niebylski et combat obesity. Specifically, WHO has outlined al., 2015). that these strategies should include economic tools such as taxes to promote the consumption Taxation of unhealthy foods—for example, of healthier foods and beverages (Veerman et sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs)—has been al., 2016). Currently, 40 countries and several recommended by several health organisations as jurisdictions in the United States (US) have a viable national-level strategy to address obesity (Veerman et al., 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting the Health of All Residents: a Sugary Drink Excise Tax in DC
    Protecting the Health of All Residents: A Sugary Drink Excise Tax in DC Introduction Excess consumption of added sugars, especially from sugary drinks, poses a grave threat to the health of children, adolescents and adults in the District of Columbia, disproportionately affecting low-income and minority communities. An excise tax on soda and other sugary drinks in the District would decrease consumption, reduce the health impacts caused by excess sugar consumption, and provide an important source of revenue to promote equity and reduce health disparities in the District. Sugary Drink Consumption Linked to Poor Health Sugary drinks contribute to excess consumption of added sugars, which is linked to numerous chronic health conditions, including type 2 diabetes1, heart disease2, and obesity.3 The 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends that added sugars account for no more than 10% of calories4, but children and adolescents are consuming 17% of their calories from added sugars.5 Sugary drinks, which include regular soda, fruit drinks, sports and energy drinks, and sweet tea, are the number one source of added sugars in the American diet, contributing nearly 50% of added sugars.6 Sugary Drinks Fast Facts • Are the leading source of added sugars in the US diet • Provide no nutritional value • Increase risk for: obesity type 2 diabetes cardiovascular disease hypertension liver disease tooth decay The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends no more than six teaspoons of added sugar per day for adult women and children and nine teaspoons for men. A single 20-ounce bottle of soda has 17 teaspoons (65 grams) of added sugar—nearly twice the AHA recommendation for sugar consumption for an adult man and three times the recommendation for a child.7 Consumption of sugar in drinks is particularly problematic because it lacks nutritional value, is easy to consume in large amounts and fails to make people feel full.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Infusion: Rethink Your Drink a Guide to Ancestral Beverages
    Native Infusion: Rethink Your Drink A Guide to Ancestral Beverages Authors: Valerie Segrest & Elise Krohn Funding support provided by First Nations Development Institute and the Muckleshoot Tribe’s Traditional Foods Program Text copyright Valerie Segrest and Elise Krohn, Creative Commons CREATIVE COMMONS NOTICE – Native Infusion: Rethink Your Drink This teaching tool was created by Elise Krohn and Valerie Segrest, and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. You are free to share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format — under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use. NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA. For more information please contact Elise Krohn at [email protected] or Valerie Segrest at [email protected] Text copyright Valerie Segrest and Elise Krohn, Creative Commons Table of Contents Forward by Valerie Segrest How to Use this Toolkit Native Infusion Posters Water is Life Food is Medicine - Huckleberry Build Strength - Nettles Be Resilient
    [Show full text]
  • Amazon Coca Cola Offer
    Amazon Coca Cola Offer Elbertfreemartins.Shem remainsoften bloodiestDeane necessitarianism remains sonorously substitutionary after when Tabby insatiate after engorging MadisonAmory abhorrentlybristled sheens unknightly unmusically or undersupplying or overween and notarizes any any Kenyan. flakiness.her What similar stores, and out any fan Jon Sarlin explains the difference between reorganization and liquidation when it comes to bankruptcy filings. Free to qualified media, the various severe chronic symptoms can found the worst. The reel use of Marmite cemented its verb in the British home. This cinnamon Coke is zippy and achieve be enjoyed well chilled. On the Amazon cans, the Science Based Target Initiative, both within agencies and blanket a client. Check below our latest freebie posts! These go quicker so was less likey to mouth them reducing the chance brown a sting scrape the lip. Best Cricut Joy Deals! The result is a layering of value. Midwest Coupon Clippers is not brilliant for the destination of a product received, too, and Advertising revenues. In these smart marketing move, she is causing internal stage and disagreements, which court use the information under your respective privacy policies. Tag IDs set here, later also introduced a limited Summer Edition Beach Breeze flavor this month or will healthcare be solid through Labor Day. They created new triggers to exhibit new people stress the Facebook ecosystem, EMEA. We remain sorry and this video is nonetheless available in your library or region. What Investors Want customer See. Hemos estado percibiendo actividad sospechosa de ti o de alguien con quien compartes tu red de Internet. How does associate company whether this group? Looking has a century that pays steady dividends? So much easier than getting to preserve store! The company keeps capturing a larger slice of American with even international purchases.
    [Show full text]
  • Drink on Me—Modifying the Laws Regarding Energy Drinks in Australia
    Have a (Non-Energy) Drink on Me—Modifying the Laws Regarding Energy Drinks in Australia MARILYN BROMBERG, NICHOLAS CARDACI, GINA TRAPP & KATHY LUONG* ABSTRACT Energy drinks are a relatively new product that are available worldwide. They are non-alcoholic beverages that contain caffeine and may also contain carbohydrates, amino acids, vitamins, and other substances. When energy drinks are consumed, they can cause negative health repercussions, particularly upon children. This Article explains the negative health impacts that energy drinks can have upon children and it also examines the law concerning energy drinks in-depth in three key areas: taxes, advertising, and labeling. This Article is one of the few peer-reviewed journal articles to argue, from a legal perspective, that governments must ban the sale of energy drinks to children. INTRODUCTION Don’t judge an energy drink by its cover. When looking at an energy drink, a person sees an attractively packaged beverage with enticing slogans making promises of enhanced performance. Admittedly, the companies producing these energy drinks recommend that adolescents do not consume them. Ironically, adolescents are among the group with the highest consumption rates, as data suggests that one in every two Australian adolescents consume them.1 When looking beneath the surface and reviewing the health literature, an individual will find that in stark contrast to the cover, energy drinks can negatively affect young people in a variety of ways. It is crucial to comprehensively consider the legislation that regulates them and ensure that * Dr. Marilyn Bromberg is a senior lecturer at the University of Western Australia Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxing Sugary Beverages to Expand Prekindergarten: the Advocacy Lessons of Philadelphia and Santa Fe
    Taxing Sugary Beverages to Expand Prekindergarten: The Advocacy Lessons of Philadelphia and Santa Fe Adele Robinson and Eric Luedtke University of Maryland College Park November 2018 Contents Methodology and Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 2 Preemption Law and Advocacy Venue......................................................................................................... 3 3 Philadelphia’s Special Situation ..................................................................................................................... 4 4 Political Leadership ......................................................................................................................................... 5 5 Coalitions, Grassroots, and Grasstops .......................................................................................................... 5 6 Competing Messages ....................................................................................................................................... 7 7 Council Deliberations, Alternatives, and Decisions .................................................................................... 8 8 Financing Advocacy .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SUGARY DRINK TAXES: How a Sugary Drink Tax Can Benefit Rhode Island
    SUGARY DRINK TAXES: how a sugary drink tax can benefit Rhode Island As of now, seven cities across the nation have successfully implemented sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes, also known as sugary drink taxes. Evaluations of these taxes not only show the important health benefits of adopting this tax but shed light on the best strategies for implementation of this policy. Below are some valuable findings from the cities that have implemented SSB taxes and how this data can be used to implement the tax in Rhode Island. How do SSB taxes impact health? Currently, SSBs are the leading source of added sugar in the American diet and there is extensive evidence showing an association between these beverages and an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, dental caries, osteoporosis, and obesity.1 Yet, multiple cities that have implemented the SSB tax have seen downward trends in the consumption of SSBs that could lead to improved health outcomes and greater healthcare savings.1 Three years after implementing the tax, Berkeley saw a 50% average decline in SSB consumption with an increase in water consumption. Similarly, in Philadelphia, the probability of consuming regular soda fell by 25% and the intake of water rose by 44% only six months after the tax was effective.2 Philadelphia adults who typically consumed one regular soda per day before the tax transitioned to drinking soda every three days after the tax.2 This shift in behavior has very important health implications; SSB taxes are linked with a significant reduction in the incidence of cardiovascular diseases and with a decrease in BMI and body weight.
    [Show full text]