The Experts below are selected from a list of 14604 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Peter Scarborough - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • health impact Assessment of the uk soft drinks industry levy a Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    The Lancet. Public health, 2017
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Ahmed Elhussein, Susan A Jebb, Tony Blakely, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Summary Background In March, 2016, the UK Government proposed a tiered levy on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs; high tax for drinks with >8 g of sugar per 100 mL, moderate tax for 5–8 g, and no tax for Methods We modelled three possible industry responses: reformulation to reduce sugar concentration, an increase of product price, and a change of the market share of high-sugar, mid-sugar, and low-sugar drinks. For each response, we defined a better-case and worse-case health scenario. We developed a Comparative Risk Assessment model to estimate the UK health impact of each scenario on prevalence of obesity and incidence of dental caries and type 2 diabetes. The model combined data for sales and consumption of SSBs, disease incidence and prevalence, price elasticity estimates, and estimates of the association between SSB consumption and disease outcomes. We drew the disease association parameters from a meta-analysis of experimental studies (SSBs and weight change), a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies (type 2 diabetes), and a prospective cohort study (dental caries). Findings The best modelled scenario for health is SSB reformulation, resulting in a reduction of 144 383 (95% uncertainty interval 5102–306 743; 0·9%) of 15 470 813 adults and children with obesity in the UK, 19 094 (6920–32 678; incidence reduction of 31·1 per 100 000 person-years) fewer incident cases of type 2 diabetes per year, and 269 375 (82 211–470 928; incidence reduction of 4·4 per 1000 person-years) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. An increase in the price of SSBs in the better-case scenario would result in 81 594 (3588–182 669; 0·5%) fewer adults and children with obesity, 10 861 (3899–18 964; 17·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 149 378 (45 231–262 013; 2·4) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. Changes to market share to increase the proportion of low-sugar drinks sold in the better-case scenario would result in 91 042 (4289–204 903; 0·6%) fewer adults and children with diabetes, 1528 (4414–21 785; 19·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 172 718 (47 919–294 499; 2·8) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. The greatest benefit for obesity and oral health would be among individuals aged younger than 18 years, with people aged older than 65 years having the largest absolute decreases in diabetes incidence. Interpretation The health impact of the soft drinks levy is dependent on its implementation by industry. Uncertainty exists as to how industry will react and about estimation of health outcomes. Health gains could be maximised by substantial product reformulation, with additional benefits possible if the levy is passed on to purchasers through raising of the price of high-sugar and mid-sugar drinks and activities to increase the market share of low-sugar products. Funding None.

  • econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment scenario modelling of the proposed uk sugary drink tax on health
    The Lancet, 2016
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Oliver T Mytton, Ahmed Elhussein, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background In March, 2016, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a two-tier industry levy on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs). Both the response from soft drink companies and the details of the legislation are uncertain. For example, companies might react by reformulating products, passing on the price change to consumers, or introducing new products and changing marketing strategy. We aimed to estimate the effect of possible industry responses on incidence of diabetes, obesity, and dental caries to inform design and implementation of the legislation. Methods We modelled the effects of an SSB price change, product reformulation, and a change in market share between high-sugar, mid-sugar, and low-sugar drinks. Routine data were identified on SSB consumption, expenditure, and waste, population height and weight, diabetes incidence, and dental caries. UK-specific own and cross-price elasticity data were estimated to model the effect of the tax on SSB purchases. A Comparative Risk Assessment model was developed using published estimates of the association between SSB consumption and disease in adults and children. Findings An SSB price change resulting from the tax could result in 82 000 (95% CI 4000 to 183 000) fewer obese adults and children, 11 000 (4000 to 19 000) fewer cases of diabetes per year, and 149 000 (45 000 to 262 000) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. Reformulation could result in 144 000 (5 000 to 307 000) fewer obese individuals, a fall in 19 000 (7 000 to 33 000) cases of diabetes, and 269 000 (82 000 to 471 000) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth. Change in market share between SSBs and diet soft drinks could lead to a 122 000 (5000 to 276 000) fall in the obese population, 16 000 (6000 to 29 000) fewer cases of diabetes, and 224 000 (65 000 to 412 000) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth. The greatest benefit for obesity and oral health would be among individuals under 18 years old, with people over 65 years old experiencing the largest decreases in incidence of diabetes. Interpretation How the soft drink industry implements the SSB levy could have substantial impacts on the health benefits of the policy. These data could be used to help inform the Government's consultation and maximise health impact. Funding ADMB is funded by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 102730/Z/13/Z). OTM is supported by a Wellcome Trust clinical doctoral fellowship. PS is funded by the British Heart Foundation (grant number FS/15/34/31656).

  • the effects of the danish saturated fat tax on food and nutrient intake and modelled health outcomes an econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment evaluation
    European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2016
    Co-Authors: Sinne Smed, Mike Rayner, Peter Scarborough, Jorgen Dejgaard Jensen
    Abstract:

    The effects of the Danish saturated fat tax on food and nutrient intake and modelled health outcomes: an econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment evaluation

  • overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20 sugar sweetened drink tax in uk econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ, 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objective To model the overall and income specific effect of a 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks on the prevalence of overweight and obesity in the UK. Design Econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting United Kingdom. Population Adults aged 16 and over. Intervention A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks. Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were the overall and income specific changes in the number and percentage of overweight (body mass index ≥25) and obese (≥30) adults in the UK following the implementation of the tax. Secondary outcomes were the effect by age group (16-29, 30-49, and ≥50 years) and by UK constituent country. The revenue generated from the tax and the income specific changes in weekly expenditure on drinks were also estimated. Results A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks was estimated to reduce the number of obese adults in the UK by 1.3% (95% credible interval 0.8% to 1.7%) or 180 000 (110 000 to 247 000) people and the number who are overweight by 0.9% (0.6% to 1.1%) or 285 000 (201 000 to 364 000) people. The predicted reductions in prevalence of obesity for income thirds 1 (lowest income), 2, and 3 (highest income) were 1.3% (0.3% to 2.0%), 0.9% (0.1% to 1.6%), and 2.1% (1.3% to 2.9%). The effect on obesity declined with age. Predicted annual revenue was £276m (£272m to £279m), with estimated increases in total expenditure on drinks for income thirds 1, 2, and 3 of 2.1% (1.4% to 3.0%), 1.7% (1.2% to 2.2%), and 0.8% (0.4% to 1.2%). Conclusions A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks would lead to a reduction in the prevalence of obesity in the UK of 1.3% (around 180 000 people). The greatest effects may occur in young people, with no significant differences between income groups. Both effects warrant further exploration. Taxation of sugar sweetened drinks is a promising population measure to target population obesity, particularly among younger adults.

  • Overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20% sugar sweetened drink tax in UK: econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objective To model the overall and income specific effect of a 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks on the prevalence of overweight and obesity in the UK. Design Econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting United Kingdom. Population Adults aged 16 and over. Intervention A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks. Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were the overall and income specific changes in the number and percentage of overweight (body mass index ≥25) and obese (≥30) adults in the UK following the implementation of the tax. Secondary outcomes were the effect by age group (16-29, 30-49, and ≥50 years) and by UK constituent country. The revenue generated from the tax and the income specific changes in weekly expenditure on drinks were also estimated. Results A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks was estimated to reduce the number of obese adults in the UK by 1.3% (95% credible interval 0.8% to 1.7%) or 180 000 (110 000 to 247 000) people and the number who are overweight by 0.9% (0.6% to 1.1%) or 285 000 (201 000 to 364 000) people. The predicted reductions in prevalence of obesity for income thirds 1 (lowest income), 2, and 3 (highest income) were 1.3% (0.3% to 2.0%), 0.9% (0.1% to 1.6%), and 2.1% (1.3% to 2.9%). The effect on obesity declined with age. Predicted annual revenue was £276m (£272m to £279m), with estimated increases in total expenditure on drinks for income thirds 1, 2, and 3 of 2.1% (1.4% to 3.0%), 1.7% (1.2% to 2.2%), and 0.8% (0.4% to 1.2%). Conclusions A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks would lead to a reduction in the prevalence of obesity in the UK of 1.3% (around 180 000 people). The greatest effects may occur in young people, with no significant differences between income groups. Both effects warrant further exploration. Taxation of sugar sweetened drinks is a promising population measure to target population obesity, particularly among younger adults.

Jürgen Rehm - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • National, regional, and global burdens of disease from 2000 to 2016 attributable to alcohol use: a Comparative Risk Assessment study.
    The Lancet. Public health, 2020
    Co-Authors: Kevin D. Shield, Charles D. H. Parry, Charlotte Probst, Jakob Manthey, Margaret Rylett, Ashley Wettlaufer, Jürgen Rehm
    Abstract:

    Summary Background Alcohol use has increased globally, with varying trends in different parts of the world. This study investigates gender, age, and geographical differences in the alcohol-attributable burden of disease from 2000 to 2016. Methods This Comparative Risk Assessment study estimated the alcohol-attributable burden of disease. Population-attributable fractions (PAFs) were estimated by combining alcohol exposure data obtained from production and taxation statistics and from national surveys with corresponding relative Risks obtained from meta-analyses and cohort studies. Mortality and morbidity data were obtained from the WHO Global Health Estimates, population data were obtained from the UN Population Division, and human development index (HDI) data were obtained from the UN Development Programme. Uncertainty intervals (UIs) were estimated using a Monte Carlo-like approach. Findings Globally, we estimated that there were 3·0 million (95% UI 2·6–3·6) alcohol-attributable deaths and 131·4 million (119·4–154·4) disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) in 2016, corresponding to 5·3% (4·6–6·3) of all deaths and 5·0% (4·6–5·9) of all DALYs. Alcohol use was a major Risk factor for communicable, maternal, perinatal, and nutritional diseases (PAF of 3·3% [1·9–5·6]), non-communicable diseases (4·3% [3·6–5·1]), and injury (17·7% [14·3–23·0]) deaths. The alcohol-attributable burden of disease was higher among men than among women, and the alcohol-attributable age-standardised burden of disease was highest in the eastern Europe and western, southern, and central sub-Saharan Africa regions, and in countries with low HDIs. 52·4% of all alcohol-attributable deaths occurred in people younger than 60 years. Interpretation As a leading Risk factor for the burden of disease, alcohol use disproportionately affects people in low HDI countries and young people. Given the variations in the alcohol-attributable burden of disease, cost-effective local and national policy measures that can reduce alcohol use and the resulting burden of disease are needed, especially in low-income and middle-income countries. Funding None.

  • HIV/AIDS mortality attributable to alcohol use in South Africa: a Comparative Risk Assessment by socioeconomic status
    BMJ open, 2018
    Co-Authors: Charlotte Probst, Charles D. H. Parry, Jürgen Rehm
    Abstract:

    Objectives To quantify HIV/AIDS mortality attributable to alcohol use in the adult general population of South Africa in 2012 by socioeconomic status (SES). Design Comparative Risk Assessment based on secondary individual data, aggregate data and Risk relations reported in the literature. Setting South African adult general population. Participants For metrics of alcohol use by SES, sex and age: 27 070 adults that participated in a nationally representative survey in 2012. For HRs of dying from HIV/AIDS by SES: 87 029 adults that participated in a cohort study (years 2000 to 2014) based out of the Umkhanyakude district, KwaZulu-Natal. Main outcome measures Alcohol-attributable fractions for HIV/AIDS mortality by SES, age and sex were calculated based on the Risk of engaging in condom-unprotected sex under the influence of alcohol and interactions between SES and alcohol use. Age-standardised HIV/AIDS mortality rates attributable to alcohol by SES and sex were estimated using alcohol-attributable fractions and SES-specific and sex-specific death counts. Rate ratios were calculated comparing age-standardised rates in low versus high SES by sex. Results The age-standardised HIV/AIDS mortality rate attributable to alcohol was 31.0 (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 21.6 to 41.3) and 229.6 (95% UI 108.8 to 351.6) deaths per 100 000 adults for men of high and low SES, respectively. For women the respective rates were 10.8 (95% UI 5.5 to 16.1) and 75.5 (95% UI 31.2 to 144.9). The rate ratio was 7.4 (95% UI 3.4 to 13.2) for men and 7.0 (95% UI 2.8 to 18.2) for women. Sensitivity analyses corroborated marked differences in alcohol-attributable HIV/AIDS mortality, with rate ratios between 2.7 (95% UI 0.8 to 7.6; women) and 15.1 (95% UI 6.8 to 27.7; men). Conclusions The present study showed that alcohol use contributed considerably to the socioeconomic differences in HIV/AIDS mortality. Targeting HIV infection under the influence of alcohol is a promising strategy for interventions to reduce the HIV/AIDS burden and related socioeconomic differences in South Africa.

  • hiv aids mortality attributable to alcohol use in south africa a Comparative Risk Assessment by socioeconomic status
    BMJ Open, 2018
    Co-Authors: Charlotte Probst, Charles D. H. Parry, Jürgen Rehm
    Abstract:

    Objectives To quantify HIV/AIDS mortality attributable to alcohol use in the adult general population of South Africa in 2012 by socioeconomic status (SES). Design Comparative Risk Assessment based on secondary individual data, aggregate data and Risk relations reported in the literature. Setting South African adult general population. Participants For metrics of alcohol use by SES, sex and age: 27 070 adults that participated in a nationally representative survey in 2012. For HRs of dying from HIV/AIDS by SES: 87 029 adults that participated in a cohort study (years 2000 to 2014) based out of the Umkhanyakude district, KwaZulu-Natal. Main outcome measures Alcohol-attributable fractions for HIV/AIDS mortality by SES, age and sex were calculated based on the Risk of engaging in condom-unprotected sex under the influence of alcohol and interactions between SES and alcohol use. Age-standardised HIV/AIDS mortality rates attributable to alcohol by SES and sex were estimated using alcohol-attributable fractions and SES-specific and sex-specific death counts. Rate ratios were calculated comparing age-standardised rates in low versus high SES by sex. Results The age-standardised HIV/AIDS mortality rate attributable to alcohol was 31.0 (95% uncertainty interval (UI) 21.6 to 41.3) and 229.6 (95% UI 108.8 to 351.6) deaths per 100 000 adults for men of high and low SES, respectively. For women the respective rates were 10.8 (95% UI 5.5 to 16.1) and 75.5 (95% UI 31.2 to 144.9). The rate ratio was 7.4 (95% UI 3.4 to 13.2) for men and 7.0 (95% UI 2.8 to 18.2) for women. Sensitivity analyses corroborated marked differences in alcohol-attributable HIV/AIDS mortality, with rate ratios between 2.7 (95% UI 0.8 to 7.6; women) and 15.1 (95% UI 6.8 to 27.7; men). Conclusions The present study showed that alcohol use contributed considerably to the socioeconomic differences in HIV/AIDS mortality. Targeting HIV infection under the influence of alcohol is a promising strategy for interventions to reduce the HIV/AIDS burden and related socioeconomic differences in South Africa.

  • Comparative Risk Assessment of alcohol tobacco cannabis and other illicit drugs using the margin of exposure approach
    Scientific Reports, 2015
    Co-Authors: Dirk W. Lachenmeier, Jürgen Rehm
    Abstract:

    A Comparative Risk Assessment of drugs including alcohol and tobacco using the margin of exposure (MOE) approach was conducted. The MOE is defined as ratio between toxicological threshold (benchmark dose) and estimated human intake. Median lethal dose values from animal experiments were used to derive the benchmark dose. The human intake was calculated for individual scenarios and population-based scenarios. The MOE was calculated using probabilistic Monte Carlo simulations. The benchmark dose values ranged from 2 mg/kg bodyweight for heroin to 531 mg/kg bodyweight for alcohol (ethanol). For individual exposure the four substances alcohol, nicotine, cocaine and heroin fall into the “high Risk” category with MOE 100, and cannabis had a MOE > 10,000. The toxicological MOE approach validates epidemiological and social science-based drug ranking approaches especially in regard to the positions of alcohol and tobacco (high Risk) and cannabis (low Risk).

  • The Comparative Risk Assessment for alcohol as part of the Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study: What changed from the last study?
    The International Journal of Alcohol and Drug Research, 2013
    Co-Authors: Jürgen Rehm, Guilherme Borges, Gerhard Gmel, Kathryn Graham, Bridget F. Grant, Charles D. H. Parry, Vladimir Poznyak, Robin Room
    Abstract:

    Rehm, J., Borges, G., Gmel, G., Graham, K., Grant, B., Parry, C., Poznyak, V. & Room R. (2013). The Comparative Risk Assessment for alcohol as part of the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study: What changed from the last study? International Journal of Alcohol and Drug Research, 2(1), 1-5.  doi: 10.7895/ijadr.v2i1.132 ( http://dx.doi.org/10.7895/ijadr.v2i1.132 ) In December 2012, the new results of the Comparative Risk Assessment (CRA) for alcohol within the Global Burden of Disease and Injury (GBD) Study 2010 were presented at a joint meeting of the GBD Group and the journal Lancet at the Royal Society in London (Lim et al., 2012). At first glance, there do not appear to be many changes to alcohol consumption as a Risk factor for death and disability: it is identified as the third most important Risk factor, as it was in the last CRA (World Health Organization, 2009). The burden of disease attributable to alcohol had increased, compared to the 2004 estimate (Rehm, Mathers et al., 2009), but this could be due to an increase in global population, or to variations in the methodologies behind the 2004 and 2010 estimates.

Adam D. M. Briggs - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • health impact Assessment of the uk soft drinks industry levy a Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    The Lancet. Public health, 2017
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Ahmed Elhussein, Susan A Jebb, Tony Blakely, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Summary Background In March, 2016, the UK Government proposed a tiered levy on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs; high tax for drinks with >8 g of sugar per 100 mL, moderate tax for 5–8 g, and no tax for Methods We modelled three possible industry responses: reformulation to reduce sugar concentration, an increase of product price, and a change of the market share of high-sugar, mid-sugar, and low-sugar drinks. For each response, we defined a better-case and worse-case health scenario. We developed a Comparative Risk Assessment model to estimate the UK health impact of each scenario on prevalence of obesity and incidence of dental caries and type 2 diabetes. The model combined data for sales and consumption of SSBs, disease incidence and prevalence, price elasticity estimates, and estimates of the association between SSB consumption and disease outcomes. We drew the disease association parameters from a meta-analysis of experimental studies (SSBs and weight change), a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies (type 2 diabetes), and a prospective cohort study (dental caries). Findings The best modelled scenario for health is SSB reformulation, resulting in a reduction of 144 383 (95% uncertainty interval 5102–306 743; 0·9%) of 15 470 813 adults and children with obesity in the UK, 19 094 (6920–32 678; incidence reduction of 31·1 per 100 000 person-years) fewer incident cases of type 2 diabetes per year, and 269 375 (82 211–470 928; incidence reduction of 4·4 per 1000 person-years) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. An increase in the price of SSBs in the better-case scenario would result in 81 594 (3588–182 669; 0·5%) fewer adults and children with obesity, 10 861 (3899–18 964; 17·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 149 378 (45 231–262 013; 2·4) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. Changes to market share to increase the proportion of low-sugar drinks sold in the better-case scenario would result in 91 042 (4289–204 903; 0·6%) fewer adults and children with diabetes, 1528 (4414–21 785; 19·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 172 718 (47 919–294 499; 2·8) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. The greatest benefit for obesity and oral health would be among individuals aged younger than 18 years, with people aged older than 65 years having the largest absolute decreases in diabetes incidence. Interpretation The health impact of the soft drinks levy is dependent on its implementation by industry. Uncertainty exists as to how industry will react and about estimation of health outcomes. Health gains could be maximised by substantial product reformulation, with additional benefits possible if the levy is passed on to purchasers through raising of the price of high-sugar and mid-sugar drinks and activities to increase the market share of low-sugar products. Funding None.

  • econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment scenario modelling of the proposed uk sugary drink tax on health
    The Lancet, 2016
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Oliver T Mytton, Ahmed Elhussein, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background In March, 2016, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a two-tier industry levy on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs). Both the response from soft drink companies and the details of the legislation are uncertain. For example, companies might react by reformulating products, passing on the price change to consumers, or introducing new products and changing marketing strategy. We aimed to estimate the effect of possible industry responses on incidence of diabetes, obesity, and dental caries to inform design and implementation of the legislation. Methods We modelled the effects of an SSB price change, product reformulation, and a change in market share between high-sugar, mid-sugar, and low-sugar drinks. Routine data were identified on SSB consumption, expenditure, and waste, population height and weight, diabetes incidence, and dental caries. UK-specific own and cross-price elasticity data were estimated to model the effect of the tax on SSB purchases. A Comparative Risk Assessment model was developed using published estimates of the association between SSB consumption and disease in adults and children. Findings An SSB price change resulting from the tax could result in 82 000 (95% CI 4000 to 183 000) fewer obese adults and children, 11 000 (4000 to 19 000) fewer cases of diabetes per year, and 149 000 (45 000 to 262 000) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. Reformulation could result in 144 000 (5 000 to 307 000) fewer obese individuals, a fall in 19 000 (7 000 to 33 000) cases of diabetes, and 269 000 (82 000 to 471 000) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth. Change in market share between SSBs and diet soft drinks could lead to a 122 000 (5000 to 276 000) fall in the obese population, 16 000 (6000 to 29 000) fewer cases of diabetes, and 224 000 (65 000 to 412 000) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth. The greatest benefit for obesity and oral health would be among individuals under 18 years old, with people over 65 years old experiencing the largest decreases in incidence of diabetes. Interpretation How the soft drink industry implements the SSB levy could have substantial impacts on the health benefits of the policy. These data could be used to help inform the Government's consultation and maximise health impact. Funding ADMB is funded by the Wellcome Trust (grant number 102730/Z/13/Z). OTM is supported by a Wellcome Trust clinical doctoral fellowship. PS is funded by the British Heart Foundation (grant number FS/15/34/31656).

  • overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20 sugar sweetened drink tax in uk econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ, 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objective To model the overall and income specific effect of a 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks on the prevalence of overweight and obesity in the UK. Design Econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting United Kingdom. Population Adults aged 16 and over. Intervention A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks. Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were the overall and income specific changes in the number and percentage of overweight (body mass index ≥25) and obese (≥30) adults in the UK following the implementation of the tax. Secondary outcomes were the effect by age group (16-29, 30-49, and ≥50 years) and by UK constituent country. The revenue generated from the tax and the income specific changes in weekly expenditure on drinks were also estimated. Results A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks was estimated to reduce the number of obese adults in the UK by 1.3% (95% credible interval 0.8% to 1.7%) or 180 000 (110 000 to 247 000) people and the number who are overweight by 0.9% (0.6% to 1.1%) or 285 000 (201 000 to 364 000) people. The predicted reductions in prevalence of obesity for income thirds 1 (lowest income), 2, and 3 (highest income) were 1.3% (0.3% to 2.0%), 0.9% (0.1% to 1.6%), and 2.1% (1.3% to 2.9%). The effect on obesity declined with age. Predicted annual revenue was £276m (£272m to £279m), with estimated increases in total expenditure on drinks for income thirds 1, 2, and 3 of 2.1% (1.4% to 3.0%), 1.7% (1.2% to 2.2%), and 0.8% (0.4% to 1.2%). Conclusions A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks would lead to a reduction in the prevalence of obesity in the UK of 1.3% (around 180 000 people). The greatest effects may occur in young people, with no significant differences between income groups. Both effects warrant further exploration. Taxation of sugar sweetened drinks is a promising population measure to target population obesity, particularly among younger adults.

  • Overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20% sugar sweetened drink tax in UK: econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objective To model the overall and income specific effect of a 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks on the prevalence of overweight and obesity in the UK. Design Econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting United Kingdom. Population Adults aged 16 and over. Intervention A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks. Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were the overall and income specific changes in the number and percentage of overweight (body mass index ≥25) and obese (≥30) adults in the UK following the implementation of the tax. Secondary outcomes were the effect by age group (16-29, 30-49, and ≥50 years) and by UK constituent country. The revenue generated from the tax and the income specific changes in weekly expenditure on drinks were also estimated. Results A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks was estimated to reduce the number of obese adults in the UK by 1.3% (95% credible interval 0.8% to 1.7%) or 180 000 (110 000 to 247 000) people and the number who are overweight by 0.9% (0.6% to 1.1%) or 285 000 (201 000 to 364 000) people. The predicted reductions in prevalence of obesity for income thirds 1 (lowest income), 2, and 3 (highest income) were 1.3% (0.3% to 2.0%), 0.9% (0.1% to 1.6%), and 2.1% (1.3% to 2.9%). The effect on obesity declined with age. Predicted annual revenue was £276m (£272m to £279m), with estimated increases in total expenditure on drinks for income thirds 1, 2, and 3 of 2.1% (1.4% to 3.0%), 1.7% (1.2% to 2.2%), and 0.8% (0.4% to 1.2%). Conclusions A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks would lead to a reduction in the prevalence of obesity in the UK of 1.3% (around 180 000 people). The greatest effects may occur in young people, with no significant differences between income groups. Both effects warrant further exploration. Taxation of sugar sweetened drinks is a promising population measure to target population obesity, particularly among younger adults.

  • Assessing the impact on chronic disease of incorporating the societal cost of greenhouse gases into the price of food: an econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ Open, 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Tara Garnett, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objectives To model the impact on chronic disease of a tax on UK food and drink that internalises the wider costs to society of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to estimate the potential revenue. Design An econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting The UK. Participants The UK adult population. Interventions Two tax scenarios are modelled: (A) a tax of £2.72/tonne carbon dioxide equivalents (tCO2e)/100 g product applied to all food and drink groups with above average GHG emissions. (B) As with scenario (A) but food groups with emissions below average are subsidised to create a tax neutral scenario. Outcome measures Primary outcomes are change in UK population mortality from chronic diseases following the implementation of each taxation strategy, the change in the UK GHG emissions and the predicted revenue. Secondary outcomes are the changes to the micronutrient composition of the UK diet. Results Scenario (A) results in 7770 (95% credible intervals 7150 to 8390) deaths averted and a reduction in GHG emissions of 18 683 (14 665to 22 889) ktCO2e/year. Estimated annual revenue is £2.02 (£1.98 to £2.06) billion. Scenario (B) results in 2685 (1966 to 3402) extra deaths and a reduction in GHG emissions of 15 228 (11 245to 19 492) ktCO2e/year. Conclusions Incorporating the societal cost of GHG into the price of foods could save 7770 lives in the UK each year, reduce food-related GHG emissions and generate substantial tax revenue. The revenue neutral scenario (B) demonstrates that sustainability and health goals are not always aligned. Future work should focus on investigating the health impact by population subgroup and on designing fiscal strategies to promote both sustainable and healthy diets.

Mike Rayner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • health impact Assessment of the uk soft drinks industry levy a Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    The Lancet. Public health, 2017
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Ahmed Elhussein, Susan A Jebb, Tony Blakely, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Summary Background In March, 2016, the UK Government proposed a tiered levy on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs; high tax for drinks with >8 g of sugar per 100 mL, moderate tax for 5–8 g, and no tax for Methods We modelled three possible industry responses: reformulation to reduce sugar concentration, an increase of product price, and a change of the market share of high-sugar, mid-sugar, and low-sugar drinks. For each response, we defined a better-case and worse-case health scenario. We developed a Comparative Risk Assessment model to estimate the UK health impact of each scenario on prevalence of obesity and incidence of dental caries and type 2 diabetes. The model combined data for sales and consumption of SSBs, disease incidence and prevalence, price elasticity estimates, and estimates of the association between SSB consumption and disease outcomes. We drew the disease association parameters from a meta-analysis of experimental studies (SSBs and weight change), a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies (type 2 diabetes), and a prospective cohort study (dental caries). Findings The best modelled scenario for health is SSB reformulation, resulting in a reduction of 144 383 (95% uncertainty interval 5102–306 743; 0·9%) of 15 470 813 adults and children with obesity in the UK, 19 094 (6920–32 678; incidence reduction of 31·1 per 100 000 person-years) fewer incident cases of type 2 diabetes per year, and 269 375 (82 211–470 928; incidence reduction of 4·4 per 1000 person-years) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. An increase in the price of SSBs in the better-case scenario would result in 81 594 (3588–182 669; 0·5%) fewer adults and children with obesity, 10 861 (3899–18 964; 17·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 149 378 (45 231–262 013; 2·4) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. Changes to market share to increase the proportion of low-sugar drinks sold in the better-case scenario would result in 91 042 (4289–204 903; 0·6%) fewer adults and children with diabetes, 1528 (4414–21 785; 19·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 172 718 (47 919–294 499; 2·8) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. The greatest benefit for obesity and oral health would be among individuals aged younger than 18 years, with people aged older than 65 years having the largest absolute decreases in diabetes incidence. Interpretation The health impact of the soft drinks levy is dependent on its implementation by industry. Uncertainty exists as to how industry will react and about estimation of health outcomes. Health gains could be maximised by substantial product reformulation, with additional benefits possible if the levy is passed on to purchasers through raising of the price of high-sugar and mid-sugar drinks and activities to increase the market share of low-sugar products. Funding None.

  • the effects of the danish saturated fat tax on food and nutrient intake and modelled health outcomes an econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment evaluation
    European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2016
    Co-Authors: Sinne Smed, Mike Rayner, Peter Scarborough, Jorgen Dejgaard Jensen
    Abstract:

    The effects of the Danish saturated fat tax on food and nutrient intake and modelled health outcomes: an econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment evaluation

  • overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20 sugar sweetened drink tax in uk econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ, 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objective To model the overall and income specific effect of a 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks on the prevalence of overweight and obesity in the UK. Design Econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting United Kingdom. Population Adults aged 16 and over. Intervention A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks. Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were the overall and income specific changes in the number and percentage of overweight (body mass index ≥25) and obese (≥30) adults in the UK following the implementation of the tax. Secondary outcomes were the effect by age group (16-29, 30-49, and ≥50 years) and by UK constituent country. The revenue generated from the tax and the income specific changes in weekly expenditure on drinks were also estimated. Results A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks was estimated to reduce the number of obese adults in the UK by 1.3% (95% credible interval 0.8% to 1.7%) or 180 000 (110 000 to 247 000) people and the number who are overweight by 0.9% (0.6% to 1.1%) or 285 000 (201 000 to 364 000) people. The predicted reductions in prevalence of obesity for income thirds 1 (lowest income), 2, and 3 (highest income) were 1.3% (0.3% to 2.0%), 0.9% (0.1% to 1.6%), and 2.1% (1.3% to 2.9%). The effect on obesity declined with age. Predicted annual revenue was £276m (£272m to £279m), with estimated increases in total expenditure on drinks for income thirds 1, 2, and 3 of 2.1% (1.4% to 3.0%), 1.7% (1.2% to 2.2%), and 0.8% (0.4% to 1.2%). Conclusions A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks would lead to a reduction in the prevalence of obesity in the UK of 1.3% (around 180 000 people). The greatest effects may occur in young people, with no significant differences between income groups. Both effects warrant further exploration. Taxation of sugar sweetened drinks is a promising population measure to target population obesity, particularly among younger adults.

  • Overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20% sugar sweetened drink tax in UK: econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objective To model the overall and income specific effect of a 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks on the prevalence of overweight and obesity in the UK. Design Econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting United Kingdom. Population Adults aged 16 and over. Intervention A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks. Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were the overall and income specific changes in the number and percentage of overweight (body mass index ≥25) and obese (≥30) adults in the UK following the implementation of the tax. Secondary outcomes were the effect by age group (16-29, 30-49, and ≥50 years) and by UK constituent country. The revenue generated from the tax and the income specific changes in weekly expenditure on drinks were also estimated. Results A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks was estimated to reduce the number of obese adults in the UK by 1.3% (95% credible interval 0.8% to 1.7%) or 180 000 (110 000 to 247 000) people and the number who are overweight by 0.9% (0.6% to 1.1%) or 285 000 (201 000 to 364 000) people. The predicted reductions in prevalence of obesity for income thirds 1 (lowest income), 2, and 3 (highest income) were 1.3% (0.3% to 2.0%), 0.9% (0.1% to 1.6%), and 2.1% (1.3% to 2.9%). The effect on obesity declined with age. Predicted annual revenue was £276m (£272m to £279m), with estimated increases in total expenditure on drinks for income thirds 1, 2, and 3 of 2.1% (1.4% to 3.0%), 1.7% (1.2% to 2.2%), and 0.8% (0.4% to 1.2%). Conclusions A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks would lead to a reduction in the prevalence of obesity in the UK of 1.3% (around 180 000 people). The greatest effects may occur in young people, with no significant differences between income groups. Both effects warrant further exploration. Taxation of sugar sweetened drinks is a promising population measure to target population obesity, particularly among younger adults.

  • Assessing the impact on chronic disease of incorporating the societal cost of greenhouse gases into the price of food: an econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ Open, 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Tara Garnett, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objectives To model the impact on chronic disease of a tax on UK food and drink that internalises the wider costs to society of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to estimate the potential revenue. Design An econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting The UK. Participants The UK adult population. Interventions Two tax scenarios are modelled: (A) a tax of £2.72/tonne carbon dioxide equivalents (tCO2e)/100 g product applied to all food and drink groups with above average GHG emissions. (B) As with scenario (A) but food groups with emissions below average are subsidised to create a tax neutral scenario. Outcome measures Primary outcomes are change in UK population mortality from chronic diseases following the implementation of each taxation strategy, the change in the UK GHG emissions and the predicted revenue. Secondary outcomes are the changes to the micronutrient composition of the UK diet. Results Scenario (A) results in 7770 (95% credible intervals 7150 to 8390) deaths averted and a reduction in GHG emissions of 18 683 (14 665to 22 889) ktCO2e/year. Estimated annual revenue is £2.02 (£1.98 to £2.06) billion. Scenario (B) results in 2685 (1966 to 3402) extra deaths and a reduction in GHG emissions of 15 228 (11 245to 19 492) ktCO2e/year. Conclusions Incorporating the societal cost of GHG into the price of foods could save 7770 lives in the UK each year, reduce food-related GHG emissions and generate substantial tax revenue. The revenue neutral scenario (B) demonstrates that sustainability and health goals are not always aligned. Future work should focus on investigating the health impact by population subgroup and on designing fiscal strategies to promote both sustainable and healthy diets.

Ariane Kehlbacher - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • health impact Assessment of the uk soft drinks industry levy a Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    The Lancet. Public health, 2017
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Ahmed Elhussein, Susan A Jebb, Tony Blakely, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Summary Background In March, 2016, the UK Government proposed a tiered levy on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs; high tax for drinks with >8 g of sugar per 100 mL, moderate tax for 5–8 g, and no tax for Methods We modelled three possible industry responses: reformulation to reduce sugar concentration, an increase of product price, and a change of the market share of high-sugar, mid-sugar, and low-sugar drinks. For each response, we defined a better-case and worse-case health scenario. We developed a Comparative Risk Assessment model to estimate the UK health impact of each scenario on prevalence of obesity and incidence of dental caries and type 2 diabetes. The model combined data for sales and consumption of SSBs, disease incidence and prevalence, price elasticity estimates, and estimates of the association between SSB consumption and disease outcomes. We drew the disease association parameters from a meta-analysis of experimental studies (SSBs and weight change), a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies (type 2 diabetes), and a prospective cohort study (dental caries). Findings The best modelled scenario for health is SSB reformulation, resulting in a reduction of 144 383 (95% uncertainty interval 5102–306 743; 0·9%) of 15 470 813 adults and children with obesity in the UK, 19 094 (6920–32 678; incidence reduction of 31·1 per 100 000 person-years) fewer incident cases of type 2 diabetes per year, and 269 375 (82 211–470 928; incidence reduction of 4·4 per 1000 person-years) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. An increase in the price of SSBs in the better-case scenario would result in 81 594 (3588–182 669; 0·5%) fewer adults and children with obesity, 10 861 (3899–18 964; 17·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 149 378 (45 231–262 013; 2·4) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. Changes to market share to increase the proportion of low-sugar drinks sold in the better-case scenario would result in 91 042 (4289–204 903; 0·6%) fewer adults and children with diabetes, 1528 (4414–21 785; 19·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 172 718 (47 919–294 499; 2·8) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. The greatest benefit for obesity and oral health would be among individuals aged younger than 18 years, with people aged older than 65 years having the largest absolute decreases in diabetes incidence. Interpretation The health impact of the soft drinks levy is dependent on its implementation by industry. Uncertainty exists as to how industry will react and about estimation of health outcomes. Health gains could be maximised by substantial product reformulation, with additional benefits possible if the levy is passed on to purchasers through raising of the price of high-sugar and mid-sugar drinks and activities to increase the market share of low-sugar products. Funding None.

  • overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20 sugar sweetened drink tax in uk econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ, 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objective To model the overall and income specific effect of a 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks on the prevalence of overweight and obesity in the UK. Design Econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting United Kingdom. Population Adults aged 16 and over. Intervention A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks. Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were the overall and income specific changes in the number and percentage of overweight (body mass index ≥25) and obese (≥30) adults in the UK following the implementation of the tax. Secondary outcomes were the effect by age group (16-29, 30-49, and ≥50 years) and by UK constituent country. The revenue generated from the tax and the income specific changes in weekly expenditure on drinks were also estimated. Results A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks was estimated to reduce the number of obese adults in the UK by 1.3% (95% credible interval 0.8% to 1.7%) or 180 000 (110 000 to 247 000) people and the number who are overweight by 0.9% (0.6% to 1.1%) or 285 000 (201 000 to 364 000) people. The predicted reductions in prevalence of obesity for income thirds 1 (lowest income), 2, and 3 (highest income) were 1.3% (0.3% to 2.0%), 0.9% (0.1% to 1.6%), and 2.1% (1.3% to 2.9%). The effect on obesity declined with age. Predicted annual revenue was £276m (£272m to £279m), with estimated increases in total expenditure on drinks for income thirds 1, 2, and 3 of 2.1% (1.4% to 3.0%), 1.7% (1.2% to 2.2%), and 0.8% (0.4% to 1.2%). Conclusions A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks would lead to a reduction in the prevalence of obesity in the UK of 1.3% (around 180 000 people). The greatest effects may occur in young people, with no significant differences between income groups. Both effects warrant further exploration. Taxation of sugar sweetened drinks is a promising population measure to target population obesity, particularly among younger adults.

  • Overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20% sugar sweetened drink tax in UK: econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Oliver T Mytton, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objective To model the overall and income specific effect of a 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks on the prevalence of overweight and obesity in the UK. Design Econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting United Kingdom. Population Adults aged 16 and over. Intervention A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks. Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were the overall and income specific changes in the number and percentage of overweight (body mass index ≥25) and obese (≥30) adults in the UK following the implementation of the tax. Secondary outcomes were the effect by age group (16-29, 30-49, and ≥50 years) and by UK constituent country. The revenue generated from the tax and the income specific changes in weekly expenditure on drinks were also estimated. Results A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks was estimated to reduce the number of obese adults in the UK by 1.3% (95% credible interval 0.8% to 1.7%) or 180 000 (110 000 to 247 000) people and the number who are overweight by 0.9% (0.6% to 1.1%) or 285 000 (201 000 to 364 000) people. The predicted reductions in prevalence of obesity for income thirds 1 (lowest income), 2, and 3 (highest income) were 1.3% (0.3% to 2.0%), 0.9% (0.1% to 1.6%), and 2.1% (1.3% to 2.9%). The effect on obesity declined with age. Predicted annual revenue was £276m (£272m to £279m), with estimated increases in total expenditure on drinks for income thirds 1, 2, and 3 of 2.1% (1.4% to 3.0%), 1.7% (1.2% to 2.2%), and 0.8% (0.4% to 1.2%). Conclusions A 20% tax on sugar sweetened drinks would lead to a reduction in the prevalence of obesity in the UK of 1.3% (around 180 000 people). The greatest effects may occur in young people, with no significant differences between income groups. Both effects warrant further exploration. Taxation of sugar sweetened drinks is a promising population measure to target population obesity, particularly among younger adults.

  • Assessing the impact on chronic disease of incorporating the societal cost of greenhouse gases into the price of food: an econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    BMJ Open, 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Tara Garnett, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Objectives To model the impact on chronic disease of a tax on UK food and drink that internalises the wider costs to society of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to estimate the potential revenue. Design An econometric and Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study. Setting The UK. Participants The UK adult population. Interventions Two tax scenarios are modelled: (A) a tax of £2.72/tonne carbon dioxide equivalents (tCO2e)/100 g product applied to all food and drink groups with above average GHG emissions. (B) As with scenario (A) but food groups with emissions below average are subsidised to create a tax neutral scenario. Outcome measures Primary outcomes are change in UK population mortality from chronic diseases following the implementation of each taxation strategy, the change in the UK GHG emissions and the predicted revenue. Secondary outcomes are the changes to the micronutrient composition of the UK diet. Results Scenario (A) results in 7770 (95% credible intervals 7150 to 8390) deaths averted and a reduction in GHG emissions of 18 683 (14 665to 22 889) ktCO2e/year. Estimated annual revenue is £2.02 (£1.98 to £2.06) billion. Scenario (B) results in 2685 (1966 to 3402) extra deaths and a reduction in GHG emissions of 15 228 (11 245to 19 492) ktCO2e/year. Conclusions Incorporating the societal cost of GHG into the price of foods could save 7770 lives in the UK each year, reduce food-related GHG emissions and generate substantial tax revenue. The revenue neutral scenario (B) demonstrates that sustainability and health goals are not always aligned. Future work should focus on investigating the health impact by population subgroup and on designing fiscal strategies to promote both sustainable and healthy diets.

  • Incorporating the societal cost of greenhouse gases into the price of foods could save lives from cardiovascular disease and cancer in England: a Comparative Risk Assessment modelling study
    PLOS Medicine, 2013
    Co-Authors: Adam D. M. Briggs, Ariane Kehlbacher, Tara Garnett, Mike Rayner, Richard Tiffin, Peter Scarborough
    Abstract:

    Background Climate change has been described as ‘the biggest global health threat of the 21st century’. Taxation based on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is a potential mechanism for internalising the wider costs of climate change to society. We ask whether such a tax on UK food and drink would have a positive impact on climate change and UK population health, and what revenue it would raise. Methods and Findings The Living Costs and Food Survey (LCF) is used to derive baseline UK consumption data and food prices. Food specific GHG emissions are taken from a World Wildlife Fund report; cross- and own-price elasticities derived from LCF data are used to model changes in consumption following application of taxes. Health outcomes are modelled by a Comparative Risk Assessment model. Two tax scenarios are modelled, where taxation levels are based on a UK governmental agriculture marginal abatement cost curve: (a) a tax of £2.72/tonne carbon dioxide equivalents (tCO2e)/100g product applied to all food and drink groups with above average emissions. (b) as with scenario (a) but food groups with emissions below average are subsidised to create a tax neutral scenario. Scenario (a) results in 6,750 (95% credible intervals: 6,150 to 7,350) deaths averted and a reduction in GHG emissions of 18,800 (14,700 to 23,000) ktCO2e per year. Annual revenue generated from this tax scenario is £2.03 (1.98 to 2.07) billion. Scenario (b) results in 3,720 (2,980 to 4,460) extra deaths and a reduction in GHG emissions of 16,100 (12,000 to 20,400) ktCO2¬e per year. Conclusions Incorporating the societal cost of greenhouse gases into the price of foods could save nearly 7,000 lives in the UK each year, reduce food-related GHG emissions, and generate substantial tax revenue. The revenue neutral scenario (b) demonstrates that sustainability and health goals are not always aligned.