Study finds Berkeley soda tax led to a huge decrease in sugary drink consumption

On the question of whether a soda tax can actually reduce the amount of sugary drinks people consume, a new study finds the resounding answer is “yes.”

In November 2014, Berkeley, California, voters passed the nation’s first tax on sugar-sweetened beverages in an effort to reduce their impact as a major contributor to chronic diseases such as obesity and type 2 diabetes. The small tax was just a penny-per-ounce on sodas, energy and sports drinks, fruit-flavored drinks, and sweetened water, coffee and teas. But according to researchers, that small tax is already having a big impact. In a study published earlier this week in the American Journal of Public Health, researchers found that just a few months after the tax went into effect, sugar-sweetened beverage consumption went down by a whopping 21 percent in Berkeley, while such consumption increased in comparison cities.

To conduct the study, researchers surveyed a total of nearly 3,000 residents across Berkeley, San Francisco and Oakland both before and after the soda tax was implemented. (San Francisco also attempted to pass a soda tax in 2014, but voters rejected the measure.) The surveys were focused in low-income and minority neighborhoods, where people are “more likely to consume (sugar-sweetened beverages) and suffer related consequences,” the study stated. Survey participants were asked how often they drank sugary drinks as well as how often they drank plain water from a bottle or tap.

Here’s what the study found: In low-income neighborhoods in Berkeley, sugar-sweetened beverage consumption plummeted 21 percent over a one-year period from before the tax to after the tax, while such consumption actually increased by 4 percent in comparison neighborhoods in Oakland and San Francisco. More specifically, soda drinking went down by 26 percent in Berkeley, while increasing by 10 percent in the comparison cities, and consumption of sports drinks went down by 36 percent in Berkeley, while increasing 21 percent in comparison cities. In addition, water consumption in Berkeley increased by 63 percent over the study period, but only by 19 percent in San Francisco and Oakland.

The study noted that the Berkeley result may not be entirely due to higher prices, but “could also reflect effects of the campaign surrounding the tax, which may have shifted social norms and thus reduced consumption.” Study authors Jennifer Falbe, Hannah Thompson, Christina Becker, Nadia Rojas, Charles McCulloch and Kristine Madsen write:

(A sugar-sweetened beverage) excise tax is one of the few public health interventions expected to reduce health disparities, save more money than it costs, and generate substantial revenues for public health programs. Already, Berkeley City Council has allocated $1.5 million to fund programs to reduce (sugar-sweetened beverage) consumption and address obesity for the 2016–2017 fiscal year. …If impacts in Berkeley persist, and evidence from other cities passing (sugar-sweetened beverage) taxes corroborate our findings, widespread adoption of (sugar-sweetened beverage) excise taxes could have considerable fiscal and public health benefits.

In June of this year, Philadelphia joined Berkeley in passing a soda tax. According to the Philadelphia City Council, the 1.5 cents-per-ounce tax on sodas and other sweetened beverages will raise $91 million over the next year to fund quality pre-kindergarten expansion, community schools, parks and recreations centers, and help pad Philly’s General Fund.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that U.S. medical costs related to obesity reached $147 billion in 2008, while the bill for medical care and lost wages and work associated with diabetes is $245 billion.

To request a full copy of the new soda tax study, visit the American Journal of Public Health. For more on the Berkeley vs. Big Soda campaign, click here.

Kim Krisberg is a freelance public health writer living in Austin, Texas, and has been writing about public health for nearly 15 years.

More like this

In ongoing public health efforts to curb the obesity epidemic, better menu and nutrition labeling is often tapped as a low-cost way to help make the healthy choice, the easy choice. And while the evidence on the effectiveness of such interventions is still emerging, a recent study found that…
At this point, it’s pretty clear that soda is bad for your health. But a new study has found that it may be even worse than we thought. Published yesterday in the American Journal of Public Health, the study found that drinking sugar-sweetened beverages may be associated with cell aging. More…
Another day, another study that shows soda taxes work to reduce the consumption of beverages associated with costly chronic diseases in children and adults. This time it’s a study on Mexico’s sugar-sweetened beverage tax, which went into effect at the start of 2014 and tacked on 1 peso per liter of…
Five million dollars. That’s how much the fast food industry spends every day to peddle largely unhealthy foods to children. And because studies have found that exposure to food marketing does indeed make kids want to eat more, advertising is often tapped as an obvious way to address child obesity…

Sugar is one of the worst drugs in life. Thanks for this interesting post.

By Nootropic (not verified) on 30 Aug 2016 #permalink

Most of the metabolic systems in the human body are for breaking foods down into sugars. Your brain runs on glucose, in large quantities. Without food products that can be broken down into sugars (carbohydrates and fats) you will die. (Often called rabbit starvation, because rabbits are so lean.)

No, refined sugar is not good for you, and no one should eat excessive quantities. But it's not a poison or a drug. Unless you also consider oxygen a drug.

By JustaTech (not verified) on 30 Aug 2016 #permalink