Active Low-Carber Forums - 'Meat tax' should be brought in to save lives

Active Low-Carber Forums (http://forum.lowcarber.org/index.php)

- Low-Carb War Zone (http://forum.lowcarber.org/forumdisplay.php?f=137)

- - 'Meat tax' should be brought in to save lives (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=481537)

'Meat tax' should be brought in to save lives

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Quote:

From the Telegraph
London, UK
6 November, 2018

'Meat tax' which would almost double price of sausages should be brought in to save lives, say health experts

A ‘meat tax’ which would almost double the price of a packet of sausages should be brought in to prevent thousands of Britons dying each year, health experts have said.

Researchers at Oxford University set out to determine the level of tax needed to offset the healthcare costs of eating red and processed meat.
They calculated that increasing the cost of red meat by 14 per cent, and processed meat by 79 per cent would prevent the deaths of nearly 6,000 people each year and save the NHS nearly £1 billion annually.

It would mean a £2.50 packet of sausages would rise to £4.47, and a fillet steak increase from £5.50 to £6.27.

The World Health Organisation has classified beef, lamb and pork as carcinogenic when eaten in processed form, and "probably" cancer-causing when consumed unprocessed.

Red meat consumption has also been associated with increased rates of coronary heart disease, stroke and Type 2 diabetes. Together it is thought that meat accounts for more than 60,000 deaths each year.

Lead researcher Dr Marco Springmann, of the Nuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH) at Oxford, said: “Nobody wants governments to tell people what they can and can’t eat.

“However, our findings make it clear that the consumption of red and processed meat has a cost, not just to people’s health and to the planet, but also to the healthcare systems and the economy.

“I hope that governments will consider introducing a health levy on red and processed meat as part of a range of measures to make healthy and sustainable decision-making easier for consumers.

"A health levy on red and processed meat would not limit choices, but send a powerful signal to consumers and take pressure off our healthcare systems.”

The study, published in the journal Public Library of Science ONE, found that a health tax would reduce consumption of processed meat such as bacon and sausages by about two portions per week in Britain.

Higher taxes on processed meat were also expected to cause consumers to switch to eating more unprocessed meat.

The NDPH are the same body which called for a sugar tax to be introduced in 2016 saying it would bring significant health benefits. The levy came into effect in April.

Commenting on the idea of a meat tax, Tam Fry, Chair of the National Obesity Forum, said: “When the sugar levy was first announced people sucked their teeth and argued it was an infringement of their human rights.

“But as the noise died down people began to realise that they had a real choice and that switching to something more healthy was a good thing.

“I see no reason why if sensibly introduced the same thing can’t work with meat. Clearly cutting down on red and processed meat is far healthier and also much better for the environment as raising a cow takes a huge amount of natural resources.”

Processed meats usually contain salts and other preservatives which can form toxic compounds which damage cells in the gut.

A recent review by Harvard University found that women who eat processed meats such as sausages and bacon raised their risk of breast cancer by nine per cent.

Red meat also contains haem, which gives the meat its colour, but which is broken down into chemicals which damage DNA. Research by Cancer Research UK found people who eat red meat raise their risk of bowel cancer by 30 per cent.

“The consumption of red and processed meat exceeds recommended levels,” added Dr Springmann.

“This is having significant impacts not only on personal health, but also on healthcare systems and on the economy, which is losing its labour force due to ill health and care for family members who fall ill.”

The study also compared to many other countries, Britain would not need as big a tax on meat, because people do not eat as much. Processed meat prices in the US would need to rise by a huge 163 per cent and Sweden 185 per cent.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science...d-brought-save/

Quote:

Taxing red meat would save many lives, research shows

The cost of bacon and sausages would double if the harm they cause to people’s health was taken into account

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-research-shows

Wow! Taxing meat would literally ensure crappy health among the poorer population.

Now us lowcarbers know what it feels like when we say, "Sugar Tax!" It stings.

Just say NO to these kind of ideas on both sides of the fence.

PS, there is no fence. The only fence is a closed mind.

When the Zombie Apocalypse is here, can we just feed them Tam Fry's brain first? It won't buy the rest of us much time, but at least some good would come of a bad situation.

While I agree that processed foods and bacon as made commercially is a real health problem, there are a few rare commercial companies leaving out the nitrates. Hence frozen bacon. There are a number of good sausages, bacons etc that are well made, just hard to find. Maybe it is the processing method that needs to be regulated.

They should go after a sugar tax first!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by thud123

Now us lowcarbers know what it feels like when we say, "Sugar Tax!" It stings.

Just say NO to these kind of ideas on both sides of the fence.

PS, there is no fence. The only fence is a closed mind.

My sentiments exactly. Freedom of choice is the way for all and the only way to enable informed purchase decisions when accurate health information is readily available.

Grrrrr, this is exactly why giving large gov't entities control over healthcare (i.e. expecting large gov't entities to pay for healthcare) is a bad idea.
It creates two issues:
1. The individual has no inclination to reduce costs because (they think) they aren't paying. "My Type 2 diabetes isn't a big deal. I just take a pill and it's covered. Besides that, surely my doctor would tell me if there was a better way."
2. Since the large gov't entity is paying and since the gov't entity can't afford to provide healthcare to the large numbers of people who think as above they must begin to dictate decisions around healthcare with an eye towards money NOT towards actually providing good healthcare. This control will include taxes, non-payment for care that is not in line with their dictates, large amounts of bureaucratic blah blah to go thru to receive care, etc.
In this case, the people spouting this drivel also think they're saving the planet. Grrrrr.

Quote:

Now us lowcarbers know what it feels like when we say, "Sugar Tax!" It stings.

Just say NO to these kind of ideas on both sides of the fence.

Yup.

:agree:

Oxford Study Explores Optimal Tax Rate on Red and Processed Meat

More demonizing "red meat".

Quote:

Introducing a health tax on red and processed meat could prevent more than 220,000 deaths and save over US$40 billion in healthcare costs every year, new Oxford University research suggests.

http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-11-06...et-health-costs

Edit looks like I got this in the wrong place, would mods move it?

OMG will they ever get it right??

Time to put a Tax on meat?

Knew this was coming:

Quote:

Slapping taxes on processed meat and red meat could prevent 222,000 deaths and save $41 billion in global health costs every year, according to a new study. If it's a carcinogen, surely it ought to be regulated in some way, because governments have a responsibility to protect their citizens from carcinogens.

In the U.S., the proposed tax would be set at 163 percent on processed meat such as sausages or bacon, and 34 percent on red meat, like steak or ground beef.

Taxing meat "makes a tremendous amount of sense," said Michael Martin, a physician and professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco.

When sugar-sweetened drinks are taxed, he noted, population health improves because people consume less of them. He added, "People have to get used to this idea that red meat is not good for us."

Another study from the "red meat causes cancer" crowd.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-it-...-a-tax-on-meat/

[thud]......................

I'll keep raising my own or trade.

Meat of any sort is already taxed here.Everything for that matter.

Quote:

"People have to get used to this idea that red meat is not good for us."

Please. Like nobody's aware of this claim. People are not only used to this idea, a lot of us are fed up with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpiderLily

Meat of any sort is already taxed here.Everything for that matter.

No food of any sort is taxed where I live. What country is taxing meat?