Meat tax could save 6,000 lives a year
Levy on ‘carcinogenic’ food could prevent 6,000 deaths a year and save the NHS £1bn, say researchers
A tax on meat that would almost double the price of sausages should be brought in to prevent thousands of people dying each year, health experts have said. Researchers calculated that increasing the cost of red meat by 14 per cent and processed meat by 79 per cent would prevent nearly 6,000 deaths a year and save the NHS £1billion. The National Obesity Forum said that it could work, as people at first opposed April’s sugar levy but later accepted it was a good idea.
A TAX on meat that would almost double the price of sausages should be brought in to prevent thousands 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 £1billion 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.
Dr Marco Springmann, the lead researcher from 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 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 is the same body that called for a sugar tax in 2016, which came into effect in April, saying it would bring significant health benefits.
Tam Fry, chairman of the National Obesity Forum, said: “When the sugar levy was first announced, people 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 good.
“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.”
The study also compared 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 163 per cent and Sweden a huge 185 per cent.