Look for alternatives rather than sugar tax

A FEW interesting points emerge with the imminent sugar tax proposed for the soft drink industry.

Type 2 diabetes is becoming more prevalent given greater consumption of processed foods, sedentary lifestyles, relatively cheaper ready-made food options and chocolates and candy bars.

Our province literally built itself on the cane sugar industry, so sometimes we have to tread very carefully.

Sugar has transformed from being a luxury to entering a new realm of affordability with numerous uses and forms in foods: think of tomato sauces, white breads, snacks and cereals, so fizzy drinks are just one element of sugar in a person’s diet.

Then comes the real crunch – the calorie intake, and here animal fats top the list when preparing meals.

Take a fast food burger meal: white bread bun, ground beef (this is not beef mince only, but beef with additives), or tomato sauce, with a fizzy drink or fruit juice.

Ask any dietitian: this is a recipe for disaster. There are many misleading claims of “sugar free” or “no sugar added” or even “fat free” .

Fat free, but loaded with sugar – took me a while to figure this out.

Which then brings us to the final question: With Treasury first targeting only soft drinks are we not creating a false perception in dietary choices?

Now people may drink fewer fizzy drinks but have more tea, coffee, milkshakes, fruit juices with no added sugar, or fat free milk and all shared with big boxes of fresh cream cakes and biscuits, thinking all is well.

An economist may call this tax a discriminatory and/or arbitrary tax because only carbonated beverages are targeted, yet all other processed foods, sweets and treats are excluded.

Before this tax is implemented maybe it’s time for Treasury to sit down with a few nutritionists to find a more effective way to encourage people to moderate their entire sugar/calorie intake and try to introduce (maybe even subsidise) lower calorie/ GI meals. This is the best way forward.

MUHAMMAD OMAR

Durban North