Author Archives: Ben Wōden

Is there a scientific basis for the sugar levy?

Discussion of the sugar levy has focused on effectiveness and moral/political hazards. I want to focus on one problem that makes those redundant: Does it make scientific sense?

Not obviously.

A popular narrative: In the past, we thought obese people were that way because they lacked willpower and ate too much food, particularly fat, which obviously made you “fat” – it’s called fat! Then, scientists who had previously been silenced by the nutrition science establishment (which was in Big Sugar’s pocket) bravely spoke up and educated us on the Science!™, and now we know that it’s sugar, not fat, that makes you obese.

Reality is more complicated.

The supposedly debunked “fat = evil” paradigm was never a scientific consensus, but merely a pop-science one. It was less the work of the nutrition scientists than of sugar companies and the makers of low-fat diet products. The supposedly triumphant “sugar = evil” paradigm also has little support amongst nutrition scientists. At best, they are marginally more concerned with the impact of sugar on health than they were 50 years ago, and marginally less concerned about fat.

It isn’t hard to blow the simplistic anti-sugar position out of the water. This graph does it impressively, and should make everyone update their beliefs significantly away from thinking that sugar is a major cause of obesity, and should absolutely torpedo the simplistic “sugar = evil” position that has taken hold in many parts of the population and, seemingly, in government.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged , and | 23 Comments
Advert



Recent Comments

  • Martin Bennett
    Brandon Masih: Illicit imports of cigarettes may happen but I doubt they will matter much. There could be a few rebellious youngsters who try it out but smoki...
  • John Grout
    I think this is a very good articulation of why Daisy voted the way she did. Personally I'm still not convinced - if the public health grounds are sufficient...
  • Brandon Masih
    Thanks for that @Simon R but why do you think it will be workable - geographic nature of NZ probably plays a better role for lower prevalence for illicit tobacc...
  • Simon R
    In answer to @Brandon Masih, I think the rolling ban will be workable for at least the next 10 years or so. Beyond that maybe less so because as the cut-off ag...
  • Martin Gray
    I'm sure they'll all be feeling good about themselves tonight . We know best you plebs .......