金融時(shí)報(bào):“糖稅”為肥胖減重？

“糖稅”為肥胖減重？

是時(shí)候政府出面解決兒童超重和肥胖現(xiàn)象了！英國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)議員建議政府應(yīng)該采取強(qiáng)制措施：包括對(duì)含糖飲料進(jìn)行征稅，以及控制不健康食品和飲料的降價(jià)促銷(xiāo)活動(dòng)等，打擊兒童身上的小肥肉。

測(cè)試中可能遇到的詞匯和知識(shí)：

obesity 肥胖

waistline腰圍

epidemic流行的

nanny保姆

countenance贊同

uneven不均勻的

confectionery甜食

conjunction匯合點(diǎn)

The compelling case for a British sugar tax （616words）

Obesity is one of the biggest threats to public health in the UK. After 30 years of expanding waistlines, one in four adults is now chronically overweight. It is an epidemic that costs Britain's National Health Service £5.1bn every year, and is growing fast.

The government is slowly waking up to the scale of the problem. A misplaced desire not to be seen to “nanny” the public has until now muted politicians' responses. But support is gathering for the idea of some form of sugar tax. For all David Cameron's public reluctance to countenance such a measure, it is something the prime minister should heed.

The idea of intervention may offend liberal souls. In fact, the state is already engaged — not least out of an understandable desire to promote better public health. There are rules in place about advertising unhealthy food to children, and the government has persuaded producers voluntarily to label the nutritional value of their products.

Still, this falls far short of what is needed to tackle the epidemic. Health experts and public campaigners are now calling for a tax on sugar. Endorsed by British doctors and Public Health England, a government body, the proposal would impose a 20 per cent levy on full-sugar soft drinks. A committee of MPs joined their ranks this week, urging the government to act.

Unsurprisingly, the idea is strongly opposed by the food and drink industry. Bosses claim that a levy would do little to shrink bulging waistlines. It would just be a highly regressive impost, bearing down on the wallets of the less well off.

The evidence on the policy is admittedly uneven. Granted, taxes do scale down on consumption. When Mexico introduced a 10 per cent levy on fizzy drinks last year, volumes fell 12 per cent. What is less obvious is the impact on waistlines, not least because the measure occurred too recently for meaningful data to have emerged.

As for the impact on the poor, it is hard to deny that they would be the most affected. The less well-off are big consumers of fizzy drinks, and these products account for a larger part of their disposable income. At the same time, children from the poorest families are twice as likely to become obese as their better-off classmates. It is the less affluent who have the most to gain from the fight against flab.

The idea of the state influencing the weekly shop may stick in the craw. However, something else already holds a large sway over taste buds. A third of confectionery purchases are impulse buys related to advertising. Public Health England estimates that buy-one-get-one-free promotions are responsible for increasing household food and drink consumption by 22 per cent, adding 6 per cent more sugar to Britain's already over-sweet diet.

True, a sugar tax is only part of the story. To tackle the UK's obesity epidemic, a multi-pronged approach is needed. Higher prices on fizzy drinks should complement regulatory changes limiting promotional offers and a more comprehensive labelling initiative. Some suggestions, such as national healthy food standards to be implemented across schools and the NHS, may actually be even bolder than a levy on fizzy drinks.

Britons consume far too much sugar. On average adults eat and drink three times as much of it as health experts recommend. The health and spending implications of the epidemic are clear. It is now time for the government toact. It would be unfair to expect a tax on a single product to transform the eating habits of an entire population. But in conjunction with other measures, it would be a much-needed start.

請(qǐng)根據(jù)你所讀到的文章內(nèi)容，完成以下自測(cè)題目：

1.How many people might be chronically overweight if there are 20 adults?

A.5

B.2

C.15

D.1

答案(1)

2.What is Cameron's attitude towards the tax on sugar?

A.moved

B.agreeable

C.chuffed

D.skeptical

答案(2)

3.Who opposed strongly the measure of sugar tax?

A.health experts

B.public campaigners

C.MPs' committee

D.food and drink industry

答案(3)

4.Where introduced a 10 per cent levy on fizzy drinks last year?

A.Brazil

B.Germany

C.Mexico

D.Moscow

答案(4)

* * *

(1)答案：A.5

解釋：四個(gè)成年人中就有一個(gè)是慢性超重的狀態(tài)。

(2)答案：D.skeptical

解釋：首相戴維·卡梅倫的一名發(fā)言人則表示，卡梅倫認(rèn)為征收糖稅不是“正確之道”，所以應(yīng)該是懷疑態(tài)度。

(3)答案：D.food and drink industry

解釋：不出所料，飲料和食品制造商是強(qiáng)烈反對(duì)這項(xiàng)提議的。

(4)答案：C.Mexico

解釋：為打擊肥胖，墨西哥去年開(kāi)始對(duì)含糖飲料征稅。