500 years ago everyone was more likely to die as a result of violence or disease. this doesn't make me feel unsafe now.
See "Household food expenditure and consumption and nutrient intake – 1974-2000" on the following page: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130103014432/htt...
why introduce a financial penalty on sugar consumption itself if it is not a major factor in rising obesity and other health problems?
what about a "healthy food tax" ringfenced for funding the costs of end of life care for people with longer life expectancy??
Note that sugar consumption has been falling since the 1970s in the UK. Strangely this "evidence" is not mentioned.
500 years ago everyone was more likely to die as a result of violence or disease. this doesn't make me feel unsafe now.
See "Household food expenditure and consumption and nutrient intake – 1974-2000" on the following page: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130103014432/htt...
why introduce a financial penalty on sugar consumption itself if it is not a major factor in rising obesity and other health problems?
what about a "healthy food tax" ringfenced for funding the costs of end of life care for people with longer life expectancy??
Note that sugar consumption has been falling since the 1970s in the UK. Strangely this "evidence" is not mentioned.