We have been calling out health troughers for years.
Just recently they have been pushing very hard in favour of Sugar Taxes.
The problem with their campaigns, apart from being government funded, is that without exception they are simply politically motivated crusades with almost no science or facts to back them up.
The troughers also don’t like to be criticised and are trying to have their critics silenced. But it has taken the Taxpayers’ Union to expose their campaigns for the political charade that they are:
In recent weeks the calls from academics and campaigners urging the government to implement taxes on sugar and fats have been growing louder. Last week for example, Auckland University academics were promoting ‘the preliminary results’ (that’s code for not peer reviewed) of a study which they said proves the effectiveness of Mexico’s tax on sugar sweetened beverages. Numerous media outlets repeated the claim that Mexico’s tax has resulted in a 12 per cent reduction in sugary drink consumption. But is that the truth?
One of our researchers, Joshua Riddiford, has been looking into the issue of food taxes. This morning we launched his report examining the effectiveness of sugar taxes in curbing obesity.
The report contains Nielsen sales data, which is being publicly released for the first time in New Zealand. The data shows that Mexican sales of sugar sweetened beverages have not moved, despite the introduction of a sugar tax. Auckland University’s public health activists are choosing to use a study which relies on interview data to support their campaign. The real sales data, obtained by your humble Taxpayers’ Union, does not lie.
Fizzed out: Why a sugar tax won’t curb obesity sets the record straight, and examines the evidence on whether introducing new taxes on food and drinks are likely to affect obesity rates. Read more »