In the backdrop of a state introducing ‘fat’ tax, we look at the consequences it bears for junk food lovers elsewhere
After being perched on top of literacy rankings for decades, the state of Kerala now seems to be gunning for the position of India’s healthiest state as well. Close on heels of its move to prohibit alcohol, the Kerala government, in a bold move recently announced a 14.5 per cent ‘fat’ tax on up-market junk food such as pizza, burgers and donuts. While doctors and nutritionists welcomed the move with joy, it has left the youth across the country apprehensive that their states too may follow suit and deprive them of their one solace that takes care of everything from Monday blues to late-night hunger pangs.
Notwithstanding Twitter’s exhortations and usual dose of levity, the move is in line with the World Health Organisation’s recommendations for dealing with obesity. However, it has once again brought to notice the states and the Centre’s banking on the ‘magical’ properties of taxation to solve their various problems (read Swachh Bharat and Krishi Kalyan). We spoke to nutritionists, industry experts and regular restaurant-goers to gauge whether or not the move will have an actual impact on food habits and how successful it may prove to be in deterring hungry souls from staying off the junk.
In view of moves such as making the “cancer-stricken lung” the mascot of the tobacco industry and a blanket ban on alcohol, there is no reason why junk food should deserve any better, argues nutritionist Tripti Gupta. However, while welcoming the move, she also contends that the effect of mere taxation without education and awareness is a moot point. “We all know the harmful effects of smoking, alcohol and processed junk. When some states can ban alcohol and tobacco, why not tax junk food, especially in a country where healthy food is easily available. It’s a good move for sure. The government is now recognising the importance of health and nutrition, fitness, wellness and healthy lifestyle. But the need of the hour is education and not merely taxation. This should start from early years, right from childhood. Every board should introduce nutrition as a subject and create awareness and education on the harmful effects of obesity. This is the only best way to inculcate the foundation of good health and reduce obesity and the other steps should be formed to simply support this foundation.”
Echoing this opinion, chef Ranveer Brar says, “Educating the consumer always works as a better approach as it helps in the evolution of perspective.” Another reason, says Ranveer, why he believes educating the consumer should take prominence is that forcing food habits does not always work. “It (taxation) might work as a minor deterrent, but I think that above all, people should be allowed to choose for themselves as to what to eat and what not.”
However, the efficacy of the move will depend on its specifics, feels another nutritionist, Niti Desai. “We need to be clear — what are the foods that will come under fat tax. It should not only be pizza and burger — it should also include banana chips, medu vada and samosas and all the packaged namkeen too. Basically anything that has more than 30 per cent as fat in its composition.”
From the nutritional point of view, the composition of the food also needs to be paid attention to, says Tripti. “Here, both the quality and quantity of fat are questionable. Natural fat is not as much a risk to obesity as transfats are. It’s these empty calories and processed foods that are bad for your health. For a normal healthy person the maximum fat limit that may be consumed in a given meal is 20 per cent of that entire particular meal. On the other hand, even 10 per cent of transfats consumed in any one meal on a daily basis can prove to be a huge health hazard.”
Adding to this view, Ranveer says, “The type of fat is very important, but specifics on an individual level should also be paid attention to. One’s body type and lifestyle also come into play a lot.”
Even as a stop-gap measure, the success of the move rests not just on using taxation as a deterrent, but also on how the revenue is used, says Niti. “It can work as a public health strategy if the revenue generated is used for subsidising healthy foods or for healthy eating campaigns or increasing spaces for physical activity. But as obesity is a bigger problem for the affluent class in this country, only taxation will not even work as a deterrent.”
