Here, Dr Natalie Pearson, an expert in behavioural epidemiology and public health, shares her views on how although the positive move represents a significant shift in protecting public health, the issue goes way beyond sugar in drinks, and needs to be part of a much bigger strategy to tackle the food system.
“The government’s decision to consult on extending the sugar tax levy to milk-based drinks represents a significant shift in its approach to public health - aiming to reduce sugar consumption and its link to rising obesity rates and type 2 diabetes, particularly in children.
“Evidence from the soft drink industry levy shows that such measures can effectively reduce sugar consumption in children, particularly those in low-income households. Furthermore, studies suggest that the introduction of the levy has been linked to reductions in childhood obesity rates. Modelling studies also project long-term improvements in the prevalence of overweight and obesity among children, so extending the levy could build on this success.”
Milk must not be demonised
Dr Pearson emphasised that although working to reduce the number of sugar sweetened beverages the public consumes is a positive step, milk and dairy products must still be viewed as healthy options.
“As the government considers extending the levy to milk-based products, it is crucial that milk is not inadvertently demonised. Milk and dairy products are a valuable source of essential nutrients, especially for children. The focus should remain on reducing unnecessary added sugars, not discouraging the consumption of foods and drinks that play a vital role in a balanced diet.”
Reform needed for whole food system
Dr Pearson also commented on how this now prompts the need for important questions to be considered relating to the rest of our food system.
“While the primary goal of the levy is to encourage manufacturers to reformulate products like flavoured milks and milkshakes, which can contain high levels of added sugars as well as numerous other additives, this move also raises important questions about equity and the broader food system.
“For a sugar tax to be truly effective, it must be part of a more comprehensive, integrated strategy for food reform - one that tackles corporate responsibility and the deep inequalities within our food system. For example, low-income neighbourhoods, especially in urban areas, are ‘food deserts’ with up to 2-3 times fewer supermarkets or fresh food markets compared to higher income areas. Furthermore, there are huge price disparities with healthier foods often costing more than mass produced ultra-processed foods. A 2021 Food Foundation report found that the poorest 20% of families would need to spend 47% of their disposable income to meet government-recommended healthy eating guidelines, compared to just 11% for the wealthiest.
“A successful approach needs to ensure that nutritious, low-sugar, and less-processed foods and drinks are affordable and easily accessible to all. This means investing in community support and food programmes, improving food labelling, enforcing stricter marketing and advertising of ultra-processed foods and drinks – which are currently aggressively marketed to children and marginalised communities, and expanding public education and messaging to help consumers make informed choices.
“Any extension to the levy should serve as an opportunity to create a healthier, more equitable food system - one where nutritious options are the easy and affordable default, rather than placing the responsibility on individuals to navigate an overwhelmingly complex and often misleading food environment.”
To arrange an interview with Dr Natalie Pearson, email the Public Relations team or call 01509 222224.