Red meat tax ‘could save 1,000s of UK lives’
A price-hiking “meat tax” could prevent almost 6,000 deaths per year in the UK and save the economy more than £700 million in avoided healthcare costs, researchers claim.
Globally, meat taxes could save an estimated 220,000 lives by 2020 and reduce healthcare costs by £30.7 billion, a study has found.
The research is based on evidence linking consumption of red meat – such as beef, lamb and pork – to an increased risk of heart disease, stroke, diabetes and cancer.
But a leading agricultural figure in the South West has said people ‘would not stand’ for a tax which could add 80% to the price of a sausage.
Scientists set out to calculate the level of health tax needed to make up for healthcare costs associated with eating meat in 149 regions around the world. They also estimated the likely impact of a meat tax on death rates due to chronic disease.
By 2020, consumption of red and processed meat was likely to cause 2.4 million deaths per year and cost the global economy 285 billion US dollars (£219 billion).
Meat tax levels high enough to be effective varied from country to country.
In the UK, the “optimal” tax level increased the cost of red meat by 14% and processed meat by 79%.
Despite the huge impact on the price of burgers, sausages, mince and steak, the scientists behind the study called on all governments to consider imposing meat taxes.
Lead researcher Dr Marco Springmann, from the Nuffield Department of Population Health at Oxford University, said: “The consumption of red and processed meat exceeds recommended levels in most high and middle-income countries.
“This is having significant impacts on personal health, on healthcare systems, which are taxpayer-funded in many countries, and on the economy, which is losing its labour force due to ill health. I hope that governments will consider introducing a health levy on red and processed meat.
“The consumption of red and processed meat has a cost, to people’s health and to the planet, and to healthcare systems and the economy.”
However, David George of the South West NFU said: “Perhaps it’s part of the encroachment of the nanny state, but it seems that for everything people enjoy eating, you find groups who want to tax it. Eaten as part of a balanced diet, red meat is perfectly healthy. I can’t see shoppers standing for a tax which would put up the price of a sausage by 79%.”
The World Health Organisation has classified beef, lamb and pork as carcinogenic eaten in processed form, and “probably” cancer-causing when consumed unprocessed.
Red meat has also been associated with increased rates of coronary heart disease, stroke and Type 2 diabetes.
The study, in the journal Public Library of Science ONE, indicated that a health tax could reduce consumption of processed meat by about two portions per week in highincome countries.
Louise Meincke, from the World Cancer Research Fund, said: “Governments need to implement more evidence-in- formed policies to help make daily environments healthier so it is easier for people to make healthy choices.”
Louise Davies, head of campaigns at the Vegan Society, said: “We need to consider the negative impact of animal farming on the environment, animals and human health. One way to reduce that impact would be a meat tax, which we would welcome, but another option would be to address the subsidies currently given to animal farming.”