Selasa, 17 Oktober 2017

Jamie Oliver's Sugary Drinks Levy 'Cut Sales'

Jamie Oliver's Sugary Drinks Levy 'Cut Sales'


17th October 2017 – A ‘sugar tax’ imposed on sugar-sweetened drinks in a UK restaurant chain led to a fall in sales and more people choosing healthier alternatives, an investigation has found.

Consuming too much sugar has been linked to a range of health problems including obesity, diabetes, heart disease, stroke, tooth decay, and some cancers.

The government has responded by announcing a levy on sugary soft drinks to be introduced in April 2018.

One expert says the latest findings are the first example of how a levy might work in the real-world.

A 10p Charge

The study, in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, analysed the impact of a pricing strategy introduced in 2015 in ‘Jamie’s Italian’ restaurants owned by Jamie Oliver. The chef has been a strong advocate for taxing sugar and has presented a TV documentary, ‘Jamie’s Sugar Rush’, about the detrimental effects of a diet high in sugar on children’s health.

A 10p levy was introduced on sugary drinks in 37 of his restaurants. This amounted to an effective price increase of 3.5%.

The non- alcoholic section of the beverage menu stated: “Sugar-sweetened soft drinks are the single largest source of sugar in our children’s diets.”

It went on to make clear that the 10p charge would be donated to a children’s food education charity and offered an alternative choice of healthier drinks, including milk and fruit juices mixed with water.

Falling Sales

Researchers from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the University of Cambridge were able to monitor what happened to sales of sugary drinks when the levy was introduced using electronic records from tills.

In the 12 months leading up to the introduction of the levy, 775,230 sugar-sweetened drinks were sold.

Twelve weeks after the levy was introduced, sales of sugary drinks per customer fell by 11%. After 6 months, sales were 9.3% lower than they were before the price increase.

The study also showed a fall in sales of diet cola, bottled water, and children’s fruit juices after 6 months. However, fruit juice sales from the main menu rose by 21.8%.

The researchers say they are unable to prove that a levy on sugar is responsible for cutting sales of sugar-sweetened drinks because of the observational nature of their study. They were also unable to differentiate between sales to children and adults.

Nevertheless, they conclude that a levy could discourage sales of unhealthy drinks, “and even small price changes may plausibly reduce sales”.

Was This All About Price?

Several experts have commented on the findings in statements. Susan Jebb, professor of diet and population health at the University of Oxford, says: “This study provides the first evidence in the UK of the effects of a price rise on sales of sugar-sweetened beverages in a restaurant setting.”

However, she says the research did not examine whether the levy might have led to an increase in sales of alcoholic drinks.

Kevin McConway, emeritus professor of applied statistics at The Open University, questions whether other factors than price may explain the fall in sales. “The menu was redesigned, it explained that the proceeds of the levy would go to [the] Children’s Health Fund, new drink products were introduced, and Jamie himself appeared in a television programme about sugar.

“So, we certainly can’t be sure that the fall in consumption of sugary drinks was entirely, or even mainly, caused by the extra 10p.”

Richard Tiffin, professor of applied economics at the University of Reading, comments: “These are quite large price increases, and the changes in consumption are not sufficient to have a meaningful impact on obesity.

“Measures that are specifically targeted at those with the worst diets are likely to be more effective.”

SOURCES:

Change in non-alcoholic beverage sales following a 10-pence levy on sugar-sweetened beverages within a national chain of restaurants in the UK: interrupted time series analysis of a natural experiment, Cornelsen L et al, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health Science

Media Centre



Source link

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar