Correction: Modelled health benefits of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax across different socioeconomic groups in Australia: A cost-effectiveness and equity analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lal A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7390261 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Correction: Modelled health benefits of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax across different socioeconomic groups in Australia: A cost-effectiveness and equity analysis.
Lal Anita A Mantilla-Herrera Ana Maria AM Veerman Lennert L Backholer Kathryn K Sacks Gary G Moodie Marjory M Siahpush Mohammad M Carter Rob R Peeters Anna A
PLoS medicine 20200729 7
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002326.]. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:A sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax in Mexico has been effective in reducing consumption of SSBs, with larger decreases for low-income households. The health and financial effects across socioeconomic groups are important considerations for policy-makers. From a societal perspective, we assessed the potential cost-effectiveness, health gains, and financial impacts by socioeconomic position (SEP) of a 20% SSB tax for Australia. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Australia-specific price elasticities were used to predict decreases in SSB consumption for each Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA) quintile. Changes in body mass index (BMI) were based on SSB consumption, BMI from the Australian Health Survey 2011-12, and energy balance equations. Markov cohort models were used to estimate the health impact for the Australian population, taking into account obesity-related diseases. Health-adjusted life years (HALYs) gained, healthcare costs saved, and out-of-pocket costs were estimated for each SEIFA quintile. Loss of economic welfare was calculated as the amount of deadweight loss in excess of taxation revenue. A 20% SSB tax would lead to HALY gains of 175,300 (95% CI: 68,700; 277,800) and healthcare cost savings of AU$1,733 million (m) (95% CI: $650m; $2,744m) over the lifetime of the population, with 49.5% of the total health gains accruing to the 2 lowest quintiles. We estimated the increase in annual expenditure on SSBs to be AU$35.40/capita (0.54% of expenditure on food and non-alcoholic drinks) in the lowest SEIFA quintile, a difference of AU$3.80/capita (0.32%) compared to the highest quintile. Annual tax revenue was estimated at AU$642.9m (95% CI: $348.2m; $1,117.2m). The main limitations of this study, as with all simulation models, is that the results represent only the best estimate of a potential effect in the absence of stronger direct evidence. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that from a 20% tax on SSBs, the most HALYs gained and healthcare costs saved would accrue to the most disadvantaged quintiles in Australia. Whilst those in more disadvantaged areas would pay more SSB tax, the difference between areas is small. The equity of the tax could be further improved if the tax revenue were used to fund initiatives benefiting those with greater disadvantage.
| S-EPMC5486958 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In January 2017, Philadelphia (Pennsylvania) implemented an excise tax ($ 0.015/ounce) on sugar-sweetened and diet beverages. This study is a general population-based study to report on the longer-term impacts of the tax on within-person changes in consumption 12 months after implementation. A quasi-experimental difference-in-difference design was used to contrast Philadelphia vs. nearby comparison cities (Trenton, New Jersey; Camden, New Jersey; and Wilmington, Delaware) at baseline (December 2016-January 2017) vs. 12-month follow-up (December 2017-February 2018). A random-digit-dialing phone survey was administered to a population-based cohort. Analyses assessed changes in 30-day consumption frequency and ounces of sugar-sweetened and diet beverages (and a substitution beverage, bottled water) in the analytic sample (N = 515). After 12 months, relative to the comparison group, Philadelphians were slightly more likely to decrease their frequency of sugar-sweetened beverage consumption (39.2% vs. 33.5%), and slightly less likely to increase their frequency of sugar-sweetened beverage consumption (38.9% vs. 43.0%). The effects of the tax estimated in the adjusted difference-in-difference analysis were very small (for example, changes in monthly sugar-sweetened beverage consumption in Philadelphia relative to comparison cities was -3.03 times or -51.65 ounces) and confidence intervals were very wide. Results suggested that, one year after implementation, there was no major overall impact of the tax on general population-level consumption of sugar-sweetened or diet beverages, or bottled water. Future studies should test whether the tax's effect differs in vulnerable sub-populations.
| S-EPMC7068482 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo estimate changes in taxed and untaxed beverages by volume of beverage purchased after a sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax was introduced in 2014 in Mexico.DesignWe used household purchase data from January 2012 to December 2015. We first classified the sample into four groups based on pre-tax purchases of beverages: (i) higher purchases of taxed beverages and lower purchases of untaxed beverages (HTLU-unhealthier); (ii) higher purchases of both types of beverages (HTHU); (iii) lower purchases of taxed and untaxed beverages (LTLU); and (iv) lower purchases of taxed beverages and higher purchases of untaxed beverages (LTHU-healthier). Next, we estimated differences in purchases after the tax was implemented for each group compared with a counterfactual based on pre-tax trends using a fixed-effects model.SettingAreas with more than 50 000 residents in Mexico.ParticipantsHouseholds (n 6089).ResultsThe HTLU-unhealthier and HTHU groups had the largest absolute and relative reductions in taxed beverages and increased their purchases of untaxed beverages. Households with lower purchases of untaxed beverages (HTLU-unhealthier and LTLU) had the largest absolute and relative increases in untaxed beverages. We also found that among households with higher purchases of taxed beverages, the group with lowest socio-economic status had the greatest reduction in purchases of taxed beverages.ConclusionsEvidence associating the SSB tax with larger reductions among high purchasers of taxed beverages prior to the tax is relevant, as higher SSB purchasers have a greater risk of obesity, diabetes and other cardiometabolic outcomes.
| S-EPMC6581622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization has advocated for sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes as part of a broader non-communicable disease prevention strategy, and these taxes have been recently introduced in a wide range of settings. However, much is still unknown about how SSB taxes operate in various contexts and as a result of different tax designs. In 2015, the Government of Barbados implemented a 10% ad valorem (value-based) tax on SSBs. It has been hypothesized that this tax structure may inadvertently encourage consumers to switch to cheaper sugary drinks. We aimed to assess whether and to what extent there has been a change in sales of SSBs following implementation of the SSB tax.MethodsWe used electronic point of sale data from a major grocery store chain and applied an interrupted time series (ITS) design to assess grocery store SSB and non-SSB sales from January 2013 to October 2016. We controlled for the underlying time trend, seasonality, inflation, tourism and holidays. We conducted sensitivity analyses using a cross-country control (Trinidad and Tobago) and a within-country control (vinegar). We included a post-hoc stratification by price tertile to assess the extent to which consumers may switch to cheaper sugary drinks.ResultsWe found that average weekly sales of SSBs decreased by 4.3% (95%CI 3.6 to 4.9%) compared to expected sales without a tax, primarily driven by a decrease in carbonated SSBs sales of 3.6% (95%CI 2.9 to 4.4%). Sales of non-SSBs increased by 5.2% (95%CI 4.5 to 5.9%), with bottled water sales increasing by an average of 7.5% (95%CI 6.5 to 8.3%). The sensitivity analyses were consistent with the uncontrolled results. After stratifying by price, we found evidence of substitution to cheaper SSBs.ConclusionsThis study suggests that the Barbados SSB tax was associated with decreased sales of SSBs in a major grocery store chain after controlling for underlying trends. This finding was robust to sensitivity analyses. We found evidence to suggest that consumers may have changed their behaviour in response to the tax by purchasing cheaper sugary drinks, in addition to substituting to untaxed products. This has important implications for the design of future SSB taxes.
| S-EPMC6354371 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the potential signaling effect of the Mexican tax on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) by analyzing the association between awareness of and opinions about its effectiveness with current consumption of taxed SSBs and with a self-reported change in consumption of SSBs since the implementation of the tax. We also examined the association between psychosocial and environmental determinants of SSB consumption with current consumption of taxed SSBs and with a reported change in consumption of SSBs. METHODS:Cross-sectional analyses of survey and food-frequency questionnaire data from the Mexican National Health and Nutrition Survey 2016. Participants were Mexican adults (20-59 years, N = 6,650). Logistic regression was used to evaluate the probability of a person reporting a decrease in SSB consumption, given their awareness of the tax, opinion about its effectiveness, psychosocial (SSB health-related beliefs, self-efficacy, and liking of SSBs) and environmental (availability of potable water) determinants. Multiple linear regression analysis was utilized to examine the association between the aforementioned factors and current consumption of taxed SSBs. RESULTS:Compared with adults not aware, adults who were aware of the SSB tax were more likely (OR = 1.30) to report a decrease in SSB consumption (p = .012). In urban areas, adults aware of the tax drank a significantly lower amount of taxed SSBs (-15.7%; p = .023) than those not aware. Self-efficacy and liking of SSBs were significantly associated with a reported decrease in consumption and with current consumption (p < .001), while health beliefs and availability of potable water were not significantly associated with either reported change in SSB consumption or current consumption of taxed SSBs. CONCLUSIONS:Implementation of an SSB tax accompanied by highly visible campaigns may further influence the impact of taxes on SSBs consumption. Future public health and nutrition education campaigns designed to increase knowledge and enhance motivation should be complemented by programs to assist individuals develop self-efficacy and self-regulation skills.
| S-EPMC6104929 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We sought to describe how revenues from sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) excise taxes in 7 U.S. cities are being allocated, who is benefiting from these investments, and whether allocations are consistent with the original intent of tax legislation. We collected information from public documents and key informants about allocations in the most recent fiscal year available (ranging from 2018 to 2021). Across the 7 U.S. cities with taxes, the average annual revenue from SSB taxes totaled $133.9 M. In the fiscal year studied, cities allocated a total of $133.2 M in SSB tax revenues. Human and community capital investments totaled $89.6 M (67% of all allocations) funding early childhood development, community infrastructure improvements, and youth and workforce development. Health-related investments totaled $36.9 M (28% of total allocations), funding access to healthy foods and beverages; support for physical activity opportunities; promotion of overall physical, mental or social health and wellbeing; health and nutrition education; chronic-disease prevention and management; and reducing SSB consumption. In the 3 cities that specified how tax revenues would be spent, allocations were consistent with promised uses of revenues. In addition, 85% of aggregated revenues ($112.9 M) were targeted to support work and programs in impacted communities (communities that experience health inequities, discrimination and exclusion). SSB tax revenues are supporting initiatives to improve community health, develop human and community capital, and advance equity. These investments may yield additional health benefits beyond those resulting from lower SSB consumption. Consistent tracking and public reporting on revenue allocations would increase transparency and accountability.
| S-EPMC8141925 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe influence of a high sugar diet on colorectal cancer (CRC) survival is unclear.MethodsAmong 1463 stage I-III CRC patients from the Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-up Study, we estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for CRC-specific and all-cause mortality in relation to intake of post-diagnosis sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB), artificially sweetened beverages (ASB), fruit juice, fructose and other sugars.ResultsOver a median 8.0 years, 781 cases died (173 CRC-specific deaths). Multivariable-adjusted HRs for post-diagnosis intake and CRC-specific mortality were 1.21 (95% CI: 0.87-1.68) per 1 serving SSBs per day (serving/day) and 1.24 (95% CI: 0.95-1.63) per 20 grams fructose per day. Significant positive associations for CRC-specific mortality were primarily observed ≤5 years from diagnosis (HR per 1 serving/day of SSBs = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.06-2.38). Significant inverse associations were observed between ASBs and CRC-specific and all-cause mortality (HR for ≥5 versus <1 serving/week = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.26-0.75 and 0.70, 95% CI: 0.55-0.89, respectively).ConclusionsHigher post-diagnosis intake of SSBs and sugars may be associated with higher CRC-specific mortality, but only up to 5 years from diagnosis, when more deaths were due to CRC. The inverse association between ASBs and CRC-specific mortality warrants further examination.
| S-EPMC8476625 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionSugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes have been implemented worldwide to raise revenue and reduce consumption of SSBs, which is associated with health harms. Empirical evaluations have found that these taxes are successful at reducing demand for SSBs; however, SSB taxes face opposition, in part because of claims that they will lead to substantial job losses. The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of the San Francisco SSB tax, implemented on January 1st, 2018, on employment.MethodsMonthly employment counts were obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics from January 2013 (5-years pre-tax) through December 2019 (2-years post-tax) for the overall economy, private sector, supermarkets and other grocery stores, convenience stores, limited-service restaurants, and beverage manufacturing. A synthetic control analysis was conducted for each employment outcome. The synthetic controls (i.e., estimated counterfactuals) were generated from a pool of urban control counties using pre-tax labor market-related characteristics.ResultsThe synthetic controls had similar labor market-related characteristics and employment outcomes to those in San Francisco in the pre-tax period. Up to 2 years post-tax, differences in employment between San Francisco and the synthetic controls were small and not "statistically significant" based on placebo tests for all employment outcomes.ConclusionsUp to two years post-tax, we do not find evidence that the San Francisco SSB tax negatively impacted net employment, employment in the private sector, or employment in specific SSB-related industries.
| S-EPMC8171954 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To examine the characteristics of supporters and opponents of a sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax and to identify pro-tax messages that resonate with the public. DESIGN:A survey was administered by telephone in February 2013 to assess public opinion about a penny-per-ounce tax on SSB. Support was also examined for SSB consumption reduction and pro-tax messages. Individual characteristics including sociodemographics, political affiliation, SSB consumption behaviours and beliefs were explored as predictors of support using logistic regression. SETTING:A representative sample of voters was recruited from a Mid-Atlantic US state. SUBJECTS:The sample included 1000 registered voters. RESULTS:Findings indicate considerable support (50 %) for an SSB tax. Support was stronger among Democrats, those who believe SSB are a major cause of childhood obesity and those who believe childhood obesity warrants a societal intervention. Belief that a tax would be effective in lowering obesity rates was associated with support for the tax and pro-tax messages. Respondents reporting that a health-care provider had recommended they lose weight were less convinced by pro-tax messages. Women, Independents and those concerned about childhood obesity were more convinced by the SSB reduction messages. Overall, the most popular messages focused on the importance of reducing consumption among children without mentioning the tax. CONCLUSIONS:Understanding who supports and opposes SSB tax measures can assist advocates in developing strategies to maximize support for this type of intervention. Messages that focus on the effect of consumption on children may be useful in framing the discussion around SSB tax proposals.
| S-EPMC4447609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:In October 2014, Chile implemented a tax modification on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) called the Impuesto Adicional a las Bebidas Analcohólicas (IABA). The design of the tax was unique, increasing the tax on soft drinks above 6.25 grams of added sugar per 100 mL and decreasing the tax for those below this threshold. METHODS AND FINDINGS:This study evaluates Chile's SSB tax, which was announced in March 2014 and implemented in October 2014. We used household-level grocery-purchasing data from 2011 to 2015 for 2,836 households living in cities representative of the urban population of Chile. We employed a fixed-effects econometric approach and estimated the before-after change in purchasing of SSBs controlling for seasonality, general time trend, temperature, and economic fluctuations as well as time-invariant household characteristics. Results showed significant changes in purchasing for the statistically preferred model: while there was a barely significant decrease in the volume of all soft drinks, there was a highly significant decrease in the monthly purchased volume of the higher-taxed, sugary soft drinks by 21.6%. The direction of this reduction was robust to different empirical modelling approaches, but the statistical significance and the magnitude of the changes varied considerably. The reduction in soft drink purchasing was most evident amongst higher socioeconomic groups and higher pretax purchasers of sugary soft drinks. There was no systematic, robust pattern in the estimates by household obesity status. After tax implementation, the purchase prices of soft drinks decreased for the items for which the tax rate was reduced, but they remained unchanged for sugary items, for which the tax was increased. However, the purchase prices increased for sugary soft drinks at the time of the policy announcement. The main limitations include a lack of a randomised design, limiting the extent of causal inference possible, and the focus on purchasing data rather than consumption or health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS:The results of subgroup analyses suggest that the policy may have been partially effective, though not necessarily in ways that are likely to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in diet-related health. It remains unclear whether the policy has had a major, overall population-level impact. Additionally, because the present study examined purchasing of soft drinks for only 1 year, a longer-term evaluation-ideally including an assessment of consumption and health impacts-should be conducted in future research. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02926001.
| S-EPMC6029775 | biostudies-literature