· 🔽sugar consumption from soft drinks in adults and children jech.bmj.com/content/jech...

· 🔽hospital tooth extractions among infants and primary school children pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38264366

Using multiple datasets, I’m proud to have led work triangulating evidence on health/dietary impacts of UK SDIL

Our findings indicate:
· 🔽 obesity prevalence among Year 6 girls, with particularly strong effects for children living in more deprived areas
journals.plos.org/plosmedicine...

A lower tax threshold (4g/100 ml) should reduce sugar intake given manufacturers reformulated drinks to just below the 5g /100ml. A step-wise graded system to incentivise lower sugar levels should be considered plus a higher tax on drinks with very high sugar (>10g sugar/100ml)

In conclusion, our comprehensive analysis of the UK SDIL, using multiple data sources to understand the health impacts of the sugar tax, suggests large population-wide benefits across the life-course starting with infants and children.

I led research on the health/dietary impacts of the UK SDIL and used different data to examine the impact of SDIL on: 1)purchasing of sugar from drinks, 2)sugar consumption in adults/children 3)obesity (primary school) 4) dental extractions 5) asthma. Here is what we found:

Our study indicates that the UK SDIL is likely to be most beneficial in the highest purchasing households (ie, lower income households & those with children). Our findings suggest that the UK SDIL may have led to a decrease in inequalities in dietary health.

In relation to the UK SDIL, confectionery purchases were stable with no evidence of substitution

Purchasing of sugar from drinks was also reducing in households with/without children. Compared to the counterfactual scenario of no SDIL, purchasing reductions (56g/wk) were seen in houses with children but there was an increase (12g/wk) in households without children

Over the study period sugar purchasing from drinks was reducing in all income groups, but compared to the counterfactual large reductions (70g/wk) were seen in the lowest income houses and there was a small increase (4g/wk) in the highest income households.

We used data on household purchases from ~22,000 households / week. We compared the level of sugar purchased from drinks, 19 months post-SDIL with a counterfactual scenario where no SDIL was enforced. We studied purchases by household income and presence of children in the home

The UK sugar tax was designed to incentivise manufacturers to reduce the sugar content of drinks by charging them 24p/litre for drinks >8g sugar/100ml, 18p/litre for drinks 5-8g sugar/100ml. No charge for drinks <5g sugar/100ml. Fruit juice & milk-based drinks are currently levy exempt

Stormy seas and a hardworking lighthouse: beautiful Southwold in January.

Future studies should factor in the growth or online food platforms which could reduce the impact of takeaway management zones.

Takeaway management zones typically occur around schools and when adopted cover ~ 17% of land area. Thus, they have the potential to impact the whole population.

Our modelling showed that a more stringent implementation of the policy led to even higher benefits to health and healthcare savings in adults regardless of whether the area they lived in was rural or urban.

🚨New paper:We modelled adult health impacts of takeaway management zones across rural & urban areas. A 50% reduction in takeaway growth led to reductions in obesity levels, incidence of type 2 diabetes, IHD, asthma, back pain,& some cancers.Plus gains in QALYs & healthcare savings
📃: rdcu.be/d0OUV

👋🏻Bluesky! I'm an epidemiologist interested in ALL things public health incl evaluation of interventions (recently sugar taxes & takeaway exclusion zones) ageing well and kid's health. Advocate of lived experience/co-production. My very old cat signalling "it's time to switch platforms, human"