The Call for a Sugar Tax

Back in 2005 Saul Eslake wrote: http://oldtt.pixelkey.biz/index.php?/article/sick-to-the-back-teeth/

I responded with this comment.

” Saul Eslake¹s address was an introduction to the opportunity this government has to remedy years of neglect in the provision of public dentistry.

But well meaning as it was, the spend-more-money model, although welcome because it does something to alleviate the acute problem, does not address the chronic need.

As in most health care matters it is instructive to look to the source of the problem. Poor oral health comes about as a result of a number of predictable factors, poor diet, poor preventative steps and inadequate care post-trauma being the major. There is also genetic predisposition.

Poor diet can be combatted by better education. So can obesity, heart disease, fundamentalism and excessive debt. Education can¹t do everything because human beings are imperfectible and in any event Coke and Cadbury¹s et al spend more and better in marketing than we can do in instruction.

The answer, as with tobacco, is to identify the makers of the products that contribute to the problem and tax them to assist in the provision of a remedy. In short a sugar tax.

You pay a levy on your tyres, in some states a deposit on your cans, in all states an excise on cigarettes.

Face up to it. Sugar, that staple of enjoyment is a substance which causes tooth decay, contributes to diabetes and is high on the hit list as far as obesity is concerned. What then is the problem with making the industry pay for the results of their product.”

It calls for a sugar tax.

It went nowhere, caused no response.

The dental health position in Tasmania is probably worse than when I last wrote on the matter. Dental health appears for government to remain an intractable problem addressed by spin rather fixing teeth.

And there is the great pity; because it is not an intractable problem. We need to better identify the causes, the differing facets arising from those causes and then consider the appropriate treatment or remedy for the differing problems.

Dental health is little different from any largely preventative health issue. We have abundant expertise to deal with the issues competently. There is simply not the political will to do so.

It remains an indictment on state and federal government that we have third world levels of dental health in much of the population.

If you can afford dental fees the quality of dental services and specialization Tasmania has to offer is on par with anywhere.

But the problem is not just access to a dentist for pain relief. Nor is it solely about how struggling working families (reference to much hyped now forgotten voters intentional) find the funds to afford cosmetic dentistry, orthodontic work or treating receding gums. I will deal with those issues elsewhere.

We need to look at the problem of poor dental hygiene the way we look at smoking causing heart disease. Just as we know smoking causes disease, poor diet; mainly sugar, causes poor dental health. (Sugar is not the only cause but it is a significant contributing factor. I want to keep this simple).

It also happens that the socio economic group that suffers the worst dental health also tends to consume those foods highest in sugar.

We appear to have given up on the preventative strategies on dental health and concentrate what little effort we make on extracting teeth or pain relief.

Think of the smoking analogy. We have taken some good steps in the past 30 years. It is time to start on dental health.

Tax sugar and dedicate the funds raised to providing health outcomes.

Address issues of diet, oral hygiene and related health issues now by focused and continuing education and promotion.

Inform the public by clear labeling on packaging of the sugar content and risks.

But more than anything else, all our economic modeling shows the simple disincentive to purchase consequent upon price will cause purchasers to eat alternative foods, lower in sugar and better for them.

And it’s because of this reluctance the manufacturers will seek alternatives because not only does it cost them more to make, but they sell less.

Two examples. If the fast food people have a bun high in sugar it costs more than a bun lower in sugar. Just like heavy and light beer. And yes; those buns wrapped around that greasy burger are high in sugar. Better still, those so called healthy breakfast cereals containing 30% sugar would cost much more than something with 5% sugar. I hope you get my drift.

I know its difficult to conceive but sugar is actually a big social evil.

All of that indocrination of giving the loved one chocolates, easter eggs for kids etc; it is all just that, successful marketing of an unhealthy product. Cut out the sugar and do the same thing. The product becomes healthier, the behaviours stay the same.

And incredibly research shows sugar is an acquired taste. Further, like drugs you continue to need more for something to taste “sweet” as you acclimatize to levels of consumption.

So the method for the decrease or removal of sugar is simple to state but so politically difficult to deliver. Sugar is a big player in Australian politics.

So what to do next. We could as governments have done just dismiss the issue and keep pulling out teeth. Or, we could think about and discuss the issue.
You might say, Is that Crotty a looney who wants to take the fun out of life. After all most women prefer chocolate to sex (or at least that’s what they tell me). Or you might say, we have government that permits the population to be detrimentally exploited for lots of reasons and I’m now awake to just one little issue, I want to stop it. So next time you are in the supermarket buy the product with the least sugar.

When I speak of sugar I speak of extrinsic sugar, mainly sucrose. The bacteria in the mouth converts intrinsic sugars to lactic acid to cause tooth decay as well, but there are usually less naturally occurring sugars (fructose). In the States high tarifs have caused soft drink manufacturers to shift from sucrose to high fructose corn syrup. Cheaper for them, just as bad for you.

The related issue of how we better provide dental services is also not intractable but beyond the size limitations of this post. If there is any interest in the subject I would be happy to share my views.