The majority of young Australians support a tax on sugar sweetened drinks, especially if funds were to be directed towards health promotion initiatives, according to a newly published Deakin University study.
The Australian-first study, , surveyed 1793 Geelong residents aged 18 to 30 to determine their support for a proposed tax of 40 cents per 100 grams of sugar in sweetened drinks.
Such a tax would equate to a price increase of 15 cents for the average can of soft drink or 80 cents for a two litre bottle.
Lead researchers Tom Richardson and Brendan Yanada, trainee doctors at Deakin’s School of Medicine, were inspired to tackle the research project on top of their medical studies because they felt that Australia’s biggest consumers of sugary drinks – young people – had been left out of the discussion around a sugar tax.
“This study is an important step in showing government and policy makers that there is strong public support for a tax on sugary drinks, particularly by young Australians who would be impacted the most,” Mr Richardson said.
Overall 48 per cent of those surveyed in the study supported the introduction of a sugar tax, but this increased to 74 per cent if the tax revenue was allocated to subsidising fruit and vegetables, and 72 per cent if it funded community exercise facilities.
More than half of respondents said they would reduce their consumption of sugary drinks if such a tax was introduced, with most of this group saying they would consume water instead.
“The likelihood of supporting a tax did not differ with gender, weight or socioeconomic status and neither did anticipated consumption, suggesting that these opinions are relatively consistent among young Australians,” Mr Richardson said.
But Mr Yanada said it was important to note that those who said they consumed sugar sweetened beverages more regularly, were less likely to support a tax and less likely to believe a tax would reduce their consumption.
“This suggests that one intervention alone will never be a silver bullet solution and additional public health interventions would likely need to accompany the introduction of a sugar tax,” he said.
“However we did find that a sugar tax would not only offer a financial incentive for young people to make healthy choices, but also act as a health promotion tool to change the public’s perception of the healthiness of sugary drink consumption.
“Of course it’s not surprising that those who reported consuming sugary drinks less were more likely to be in favour of a tax, and more likely to indicate their consumption would drop even further if a tax was introduced.”
Research supervisor Professor Colin Bell, Deputy Director of Deakin’s Global Obesity Centre in the Institute for Health Transformation, said it was well known that the consumption of sugary drinks was a significant contributor to obesity, so any evidence-based way to reduce this consumption needed to be championed.
“With two thirds of adults and more than one quarter of children either overweight or obese, Australia is well and truly in the midst of an obesity epidemic,” Professor Bell said.
“Young people are the highest consumers of sugary drinks, but there’s been no research until now to understand how they feel about a sugar sweetened beverage tax. This study shows they are clearly supportive if the money raised from a tax is used for health promotion.”
When surveyed, two in five young people reported drinking a sugar sweetened beverage the previous day. Young adults who were obese or from poorer postcodes had a higher consumption, as did men compared to women.
