Should Thailand tax junk food to help fight obesity?

[mogandave]

Yet still:

In the last 50 years life expectancy in the US has increased ten years (from about 70 to about 80)

Running water has been commonplace for well over 100 years, and there have been no significant changes in hygiene in at least the last fifty years.

I submit that liberalism is causing obesity. The more liberal a county gets, the more obese it's citizens.

[Thai at Heart]

I would be surprised if fructose was a problem, since surely it is one of the principal sugars we evolved to eat. But you are right, I remember reading someone wanging off about how it was much worse than sucrose (or perhaps it was vice versa).

I remember when fat was bad and oil was good, I remember when potatoes were OK but chips were not, but throughout it all, tax has always been seen as something undesirable, and to be minimised as best we can.

Obviously, bureaucrats and reveners may take a different view, corrupt ones probably more so than honest ones.

SC

Fructose is about volume.

Snack on an orange, and you get the given volume of sucrose with the fibre of the orange.. Have a glass of orange juice and receive the volume of fructose from several oranges.

Have hfcs get an abnormal dose of sucrose versus sucrose in comparison with sugar which is reportedly not chemically bound in the same manner as table sugar and thus overload your liver.

Either way refined sugar in huge volume is no good, but we aren't fruitarians eitther. We aren't meant to eat the fructose equivalent of dozens of pieces of fruit every day.

What if the dozens of pieces of fruit were raisins? (just kidding)

I know too much sugar is bad, and HFCS is worse, but this is the first Ive heard of it having a negative effect on the liver. I would like to see something that supports this.

Keep in mind, we were never meant to eat cooked meat, bread, boysenberries, decent corn, pasta, nice big oranges and apples, and thousands of other great tasting, healthy, wholesome foods.

One could argue we were meant to drink wine, but beer and spirits? No.

Oh, we werent meant live past thirty either. So while people are generally getting fatter, they are also living longer.

I will dig out the links. This is what it is apparently causing leading to a fatty liver.

I was shocked to see it too.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/23390127/

Abstract

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common chronic liver disease in adults and children. A number of genetic and environmental factors are known to predispose individuals to NAFLD. Certain dietary sugars, particularly fructose, are suspected to contribute to the development of NAFLD and its progression.

The way that fructose goes through your digestion is different from sucrose so big volumes of fructose can have weird effects on your liver.

Its just that particularly hfcs is product so new to the human diet that it's possible it is highly responsible for obesity. Best avoided I think.

"...suspected to contribute to..."

I always want to know how a study was done, and who funded it.

That is just one of the links.

There are numerous studies and articles discussing the same thing. This is now widely believed to be an issue and, hey, what's the problem.

Just eat less sucrose. I.e. eat fruit instead of juice. Lay off the hfcs. Eat less cakes and sweets. Avoid sweet fizzy drinks .It can't do any harm to lay off it. Fortunately my kids ate stick thin anyway.

Edited January 20, 2014 by Thai at Heart

[mogandave]

I would be surprised if fructose was a problem, since surely it is one of the principal sugars we evolved to eat. But you are right, I remember reading someone wanging off about how it was much worse than sucrose (or perhaps it was vice versa).

I remember when fat was bad and oil was good, I remember when potatoes were OK but chips were not, but throughout it all, tax has always been seen as something undesirable, and to be minimised as best we can.

Obviously, bureaucrats and reveners may take a different view, corrupt ones probably more so than honest ones.

SC

Fructose is about volume.

Snack on an orange, and you get the given volume of sucrose with the fibre of the orange.. Have a glass of orange juice and receive the volume of fructose from several oranges.

Have hfcs get an abnormal dose of sucrose versus sucrose in comparison with sugar which is reportedly not chemically bound in the same manner as table sugar and thus overload your liver.

Either way refined sugar in huge volume is no good, but we aren't fruitarians eitther. We aren't meant to eat the fructose equivalent of dozens of pieces of fruit every day.

What if the dozens of pieces of fruit were raisins? (just kidding)

I know too much sugar is bad, and HFCS is worse, but this is the first Ive heard of it having a negative effect on the liver. I would like to see something that supports this.

Keep in mind, we were never meant to eat cooked meat, bread, boysenberries, decent corn, pasta, nice big oranges and apples, and thousands of other great tasting, healthy, wholesome foods.

One could argue we were meant to drink wine, but beer and spirits? No.

Oh, we werent meant live past thirty either. So while people are generally getting fatter, they are also living longer.

I will dig out the links. This is what it is apparently causing leading to a fatty liver.

I was shocked to see it too.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/23390127/

Abstract

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common chronic liver disease in adults and children. A number of genetic and environmental factors are known to predispose individuals to NAFLD. Certain dietary sugars, particularly fructose, are suspected to contribute to the development of NAFLD and its progression.

The way that fructose goes through your digestion is different from sucrose so big volumes of fructose can have weird effects on your liver.

Its just that particularly hfcs is product so new to the human diet that it's possible it is highly responsible for obesity. Best avoided I think.

"...suspected to contribute to..."

I always want to know how a study was done, and who funded it.

That is just one of the links.

There are numerous studies and articles discussing the same thing. This is now widely believed to be an issue and, hey, what's the problem.

Just eat less sucrose. I.e. eat fruit instead of juice. Lay off the hfcs. Eat less cakes and sweets. Avoid sweet fizzy drinks .It can't do any harm to lay off it. Fortunately my kids ate stick thin anyway.

Unfortunately, and particularly when long money is involved, the same people fund multiple completely legitimate studies, and only publish what works out for them.

One big problem we have now is that we are inundated with information. When you get any kind of medication, the list of warnings is so long it is useless. It is the same with any number of things.

I have cirrhosis and see a doctor (arguably the best) in Thailand twice a year, a doctor in the US once a year, have done a bit of reading on it, and have never heard of the connection, or been told to cut down on soda-pop. I’m not saying it’s not true, but if it is, I don’t know that it is that significant.

Now with fruit and vegetables you have to worry about pesticides and whatnot. To be clear, I don’t drink soda or juice or sugary snacks for that matter, I’m pretty much coffee or water.

I do not think HFCS if a healthy food, nor do I think drinking a lot of soda is a good idea with our without HFCS.

[Thai at Heart]

To mogandave.

The issue is that hfcs is a new food and the chance that it has an of side effect is probably quite high.

That wedded to the fact that the most common product that it is in is soda in the usa means that it is going up against big money to make any changes.

I've found loads of articles about the unintended cause of fatty liver.

[mogandave]

To mogandave.

The issue is that hfcs is a new food and the chance that it has an of side effect is probably quite high.

That wedded to the fact that the most common product that it is in is soda in the usa means that it is going up against big money to make any changes.

I've found loads of articles about the unintended cause of fatty liver.

I’ve said repeatedly it could well be true, so I’m not sure what your point is.

TO be cleat, I am not saying the studies are incorrect, I am just saying that I am not as 100% convinced as you seem to be that HFCS is causing significant liver damage.

The link was to a report, not a study. The links are always to reports, never to studies.

While it has not been around forever, 50 years is not what I would call new.

[maxme]

Interesting, you are wondering if there should be an obesity tax when a majority of the people don't even pay income tax

[StreetCowboy]

Should Thailand tax rice to combat obesity?

[Jingthing]

Interesting, you are wondering if there should be an obesity tax when a majority of the people don't even pay income tax

Thai people pay taxes that aren't income taxes.

[sustento]

Diabetes in Thailand Statistics Indicate Disease Out of Control

Diabetes Mellitus (Type 2) now Thailand’s third largest cause of death

Statistics from the World Health Organisation for causes of death in 2010 indicate diabetes now to be the third largest cause of deaths in Thailand after strokes and coronary heart disease. Deaths from this cause totalled nearly 7% of all deaths recorded in 2010, a figure which is more than double the global average and has prompted the WHO to describe Thailand’s performance in this area as very poor – falling within the bottom 10% of all countries globally.

http://inversionpoint.com/diabetes-in-thailand-statistics/

Smoking is 20%, and is not in the top three, yet diabetes comes in third at 7%?

I don't think smoking ever killed anyone, except insofar as it was a contributor to strokes, coronary heart disease, diabetes, or even cancer, occasionally.

SC

The same is true of diabetes. It doesn't actually kill you - it just makes you more prone to things that do.

[Thai at Heart]

To mogandave.

The issue is that hfcs is a new food and the chance that it has an of side effect is probably quite high.

That wedded to the fact that the most common product that it is in is soda in the usa means that it is going up against big money to make any changes.

I've found loads of articles about the unintended cause of fatty liver.

Ive said repeatedly it could well be true, so Im not sure what your point is.

TO be cleat, I am not saying the studies are incorrect, I am just saying that I am not as 100% convinced as you seem to be that HFCS is causing significant liver damage.

The link was to a report, not a study. The links are always to reports, never to studies.

While it has not been around forever, 50 years is not what I would call new.

There are thousands of links for articles and reports with the same theory. Its even on he hfcs wiki webpage.

Its been around a while but in reality the huge uptake in consumption was in the 70s and 80s.

The kids of the 80s would now be 30odd. Its the law of unintended consequence. It could be or could not be, but studies are starting to point that way.

I will try to avoid it.

Edited January 20, 2014 by Thai at Heart

[David48]

Yet still:

In the last 50 years life expectancy in the US has increased ten years (from about 70 to about 80)

Running water has been commonplace for well over 100 years, and there have been no significant changes in hygiene in at least the last fifty years.

I submit that liberalism is causing obesity. The more liberal a county gets, the more obese it's citizens.

Should we then propose a tax on 'liberalism'.

But this concept strikes a discord with me as I'm a fairly Liberal kind of guy.

I don't wish to be taxed any more ...

[Thai at Heart]

Yet still:

In the last 50 years life expectancy in the US has increased ten years (from about 70 to about 80)

Running water has been commonplace for well over 100 years, and there have been no significant changes in hygiene in at least the last fifty years.

I submit that liberalism is causing obesity. The more liberal a county gets, the more obese it's citizens.

Should we then propose a tax on 'liberalism'.

But this concept strikes a discord with me as I'm a fairly Liberal kind of guy.

I don't wish to be taxed any more ...

Free government vaccine programme and investment in sanitation will do that.

[brit1984]

Should Thailand tax rice to combat obesity?

or tax obesity to fund the rice scheme?

[Showbags]

Interesting, you are wondering if there should be an obesity tax when a majority of the people don't even pay income tax alt=blink.png pagespeed_url_hash=3007605675 width=20 height=20>

That is why you tax the food at the heart of the issue...so those nasty fat tax dodges cannot dodge it.

[mogandave]

Most everyone pays taxes that are not income taxes, but taxing food and fuel seems to place a disproportionally high burden on the poor.

Taxing gasoline and electricity to reduce consumption works, but it only works on the poor. The rich get to continue keeping their houses cool and their cars big. F… that.

If you want to stop kids from drinking soda-pop, why not ban advertising and initiate a minimum age requirement?

If you want to stop everyone from drinking soda-pop, again: Grow a pair and take it off the market.

[mogandave]

To mogandave.

The issue is that hfcs is a new food and the chance that it has an of side effect is probably quite high.

That wedded to the fact that the most common product that it is in is soda in the usa means that it is going up against big money to make any changes.

I've found loads of articles about the unintended cause of fatty liver.

Ive said repeatedly it could well be true, so Im not sure what your point is.

TO be cleat, I am not saying the studies are incorrect, I am just saying that I am not as 100% convinced as you seem to be that HFCS is causing significant liver damage.

The link was to a report, not a study. The links are always to reports, never to studies.

While it has not been around forever, 50 years is not what I would call new.

There are thousands of links for articles and reports with the same theory. Its even on he hfcs wiki webpage.

Its been around a while but in reality the huge uptake in consumption was in the 70s and 80s.

The kids of the 80s would now be 30odd. Its the law of unintended consequence. It could be or could not be, but studies are starting to point that way.

I will try to avoid it.

Okay, it's only been widely used for 35-45 years, but you are right, anyone that does not agree 100% and with all certainty that HFCS causes significant liver damage is a fool.

When your report says drinking a lot of HFCS is linked to liver disease, how much HFCS is considered a lot?

A large percentage of people that drink diet soda are obese = Drinking diet soda is linked to obesity.

I just Googled "Studies that prove the world is flat" and got over 19 million hits.

[brit1984]

the government should regulate and tax (net) calorie intake until everybody is perfect

[mogandave]

Well, so much for working together to solve Thailand's obesity pandemic.

Just when I thought we making progress discussing real, unbiased, promising solutions.

Hey, what if we just wire everyone's mouths shut and poke holes in all the straws?

Problem solved, next!

[Thai at Heart]

Well, so much for working together to solve Thailand's obesity pandemic.

Just when I thought we making progress discussing real, unbiased, promising solutions.

Hey, what if we just wire everyone's mouths shut and poke holes in all the straws?

Problem solved, next!

Lol

Seems that the SOE stole the momentum.

What represents a lot of hfcs, or sugar. For me, considering I drink a lot of coffee with a spoon of sugar in each cup, a coke on top with a bowl of frosties would be too much by far.

Basically, dump the coke and fanta buys a lot of leeway.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Thai at Heart

[mogandave]

Well, so much for working together to solve Thailand's obesity pandemic.

Just when I thought we making progress discussing real, unbiased, promising solutions.

Hey, what if we just wire everyone's mouths shut and poke holes in all the straws?

Problem solved, next!

Lol

Seems that the SOE stole the momentum.

What represents a lot of hfcs, or sugar. For me, considering I drink a lot of coffee with a spoon of sugar in each cup, a coke on top with a bowl of frosties would be too much by far.

Basically, dump the coke and fanta buys a lot of leeway.

I was not asking what you thought a lot of HFCS was, but rather what was considered a lot for the purpose of the study.

I don't take sugar in coffee, and don't drink soda, but I do like Crystal Lite. Unfortunately, I understand it causes cancer.

I understand that soft drinks in Thailand generally do not use HFCS.

[chiangmaibruce]

This news may be of interest to readers of this thread: http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2014/01/21/how-do-you-say-calories-in-thai-nutrition-app-reads-thai-food-barcodes-wins-hackathon?cid=EAP_NLThailandEN_P_EXT

[Thai at Heart]

Well, so much for working together to solve Thailand's obesity pandemic.

Just when I thought we making progress discussing real, unbiased, promising solutions.

Hey, what if we just wire everyone's mouths shut and poke holes in all the straws?

Problem solved, next!

Lol

Seems that the SOE stole the momentum.

What represents a lot of hfcs, or sugar. For me, considering I drink a lot of coffee with a spoon of sugar in each cup, a coke on top with a bowl of frosties would be too much by far.

Basically, dump the coke and fanta buys a lot of leeway.

I was not asking what you thought a lot of HFCS was, but rather what was considered a lot for the purpose of the study.

I don't take sugar in coffee, and don't drink soda, but I do like Crystal Lite. Unfortunately, I understand it causes cancer.

I understand that soft drinks in Thailand generally do not use HFCS.

Little hfcs is Thailand.

Sugar in general I am trying to reduce.

Apparently a reasonable target is 8 tea spoons a day. Doesn't leave much open if you drink coke that is for sure.

[mogandave]

Well, it looks liek our work is done here, good job fellas!

[Jingthing]

Is Sugar the new cigarettes?

I think it should be.

Ciggies cause cancer.

Excess sugar causes obesity which causes cancer, heart disease, depression, etc.

http://www.laweekly.com/publicspectacle/2014/01/20/is-sugar-the-new-cigarettes-a-new-sundance-film-thinks-so

Sugar increases insulin, insulin increases fat storage. And it's addictive. In a study Soechtig quotes, 93 percent of lab rats chose sugar water over cocaine.

Edited January 27, 2014 by Jingthing

[Prbkk]

Is Sugar the new cigarettes?

I think it should be.

Ciggies cause cancer.

Excess sugar causes obesity which causes cancer, heart disease, depression, etc.

http://www.laweekly.com/publicspectacle/2014/01/20/is-sugar-the-new-cigarettes-a-new-sundance-film-thinks-so

Sugar increases insulin, insulin increases fat storage. And it's addictive. In a study Soechtig quotes, 93 percent of lab rats chose sugar water over cocaine.

Of course it is and one only has to look at the pattern in China to see what is coming for Thailand. One child policy ( now being tweeted) , both parents working, grandparents looking after the kid and spoiling it rotten ( almost force-feeding), more so if male, huge increase in child obesity....kids under 10 at morbidly obese levels....completely unheard of for obvious reasons prior to this generation. Changing demographics, increased wealth, junk food, westernization....exactly the same thing will happen in Thailand. Absolutely preventable.

[StreetCowboy]

Is Sugar the new cigarettes?

I think it should be.

Ciggies cause cancer.

Excess sugar causes obesity which causes cancer, heart disease, depression, etc.

http://www.laweekly.com/publicspectacle/2014/01/20/is-sugar-the-new-cigarettes-a-new-sundance-film-thinks-so

Sugar increases insulin, insulin increases fat storage. And it's addictive. In a study Soechtig quotes, 93 percent of lab rats chose sugar water over cocaine.

Of course it is and one only has to look at the pattern in China to see what is coming for Thailand. One child policy ( now being tweeted) , both parents working, grandparents looking after the kid and spoiling it rotten ( almost force-feeding), more so if male, huge increase in child obesity....kids under 10 at morbidly obese levels....completely unheard of for obvious reasons prior to this generation. Changing demographics, increased wealth, junk food, westernization....exactly the same thing will happen in Thailand. Absolutely preventable.

Preventable how? With the leaden foot of social engineering and the rapacious claw of the revenue?

Perhaps a thin-child policy? That might work in China, where they take their government slightly more seriously...

SC

[mogandave]

People with fat children are incompetent and their children should be taken away and raised by the state.

What is this obsession with health, and why is it the state's business?

Doesn't the state have more pressing matters than getting caught up worrying how much soda-pop kids are drinking?

Apparently, the same people that don't want kids to drink soda-pop want to make sure they have plenty of weed to smoke.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Showbags]

Weeds a good pacifier.

[Brevity]

What is this obsession with health, and why is it the state's business?

Doesn't the state have more pressing matters than getting caught up worrying how much soda-pop kids are drinking?

I believe it matters to the government and may be the state's business because many Thais are on social security, i.e. 30-baht health care, so the fewer Thais that self-inflict obesity related problems, the less cost to the government, and the way that Yingluck S. wastes and p*sses away money every little bit they can save helps.

I have read only a few of the posts, but if we're voting on this, I vote YES, it should be taxed higher. Because I eat so little of it, the extra taxation won't affect my budget.

Split the money collected between health education, medical costs, and subsidizing the price of healthy, whole food, making it bargain priced and more appealing to buy.

[mogandave]

What is this obsession with health, and why is it the state's business?

Doesn't the state have more pressing matters than getting caught up worrying how much soda-pop kids are drinking?

I believe it matters to the government and may be the state's business because many Thais are on social security, i.e. 30-baht health care, so the fewer Thais that self-inflict obesity related problems, the less cost to the government, and the way that Yingluck S. wastes and p*sses away money every little bit they can save helps.

I have read only a few of the posts, but if we're voting on this, I vote YES, it should be taxed higher. Because I eat so little of it, the extra taxation won't affect my budget.

Split the money collected between health education, medical costs, and subsidizing the price of healthy, whole food, making it bargain priced and more appealing to buy.

So there is no actual concern for the health of the population, it is a simply a monetary issue, correct?

If that’s the case, it seems using the progressive income taxes to subsidize healthcare would be more fair than initiating a hideously regressive tax on foods.

So what junk foods would you tax?

What healthy foods would you subsidize?