3 ms·

The thing to do, is if your health care is paid for by taxes (like the NHS), is for taxes to be levied proportionately on the higher-risk things that will hospi

The thing to do, is if your health care is paid for by taxes (like the NHS), is for taxes to be levied proportionately on the higher-risk things that will hospitalize you. The UK already has sky-high taxation on tobacco. I rather like the idea of the Fat Tax as well. Placing a tax on fat content would increase the proportion of earnings used for the NHS by those who would use it the most. It would also provide a disincentive to eat unhealthy in the first place. Of course, many many people think this smells a lot like social engineering (what isn't at government level?), so this wouldn't pass in the UK, let alone the US. Lots of good background on Fat Tax in the References at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_tax http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_tax

MaysonL 16y ago
Fat content has virtually nothing to do with obesity. I get 20-30% of my calories from fat (mainly butter and cheese), weigh about 155 lb., 6-1, lipid levels good.
- sudonim 16y ago
  Kudos to you. So many people equate fat to increasing your fat. Granted, drinking a glass of bacon grease is no good for you, but replacing it with chemically altered low-fat everything is not a viable replacement.
- nostrademons 16y ago
  You could tax calories instead. Calories in - calories out seems to be a pretty good proxy for weight gain. And I bet I wouldn't drink quite so much soda if it couldn't be had for 75c per 2-liter bottle.
  - euccastro 16y ago
    Calories in-calories out is a pretty bad proxy for weight gain and health in general. Google Gary Taubes; he's done a great job of digging up and deconstructing a century's worth of research on the matter.
    - Evgeny 16y ago
      There is massive debate still going about the Taubes' arguments against 'calories in - calories out'. There is a lot of evidence in support of 'calories in - calories out' and it is way too early to conclude that if Taubes said so, it must be right.
      - khafra 16y ago
        The fact that there's a massive debate means we don't know enough about nutrition to legislatively micromanage it.
ciupicri 16y ago
Speaking of fat, you should have a look at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet

MaysonL 16y ago

Fat content has virtually nothing to do with obesity. I get 20-30% of my calories from fat (mainly butter and cheese), weigh about 155 lb., 6-1, lipid levels good.

sudonim 16y ago
Kudos to you. So many people equate fat to increasing your fat. Granted, drinking a glass of bacon grease is no good for you, but replacing it with chemically altered low-fat everything is not a viable replacement.
nostrademons 16y ago
You could tax calories instead. Calories in - calories out seems to be a pretty good proxy for weight gain. And I bet I wouldn't drink quite so much soda if it couldn't be had for 75c per 2-liter bottle.
- euccastro 16y ago
  Calories in-calories out is a pretty bad proxy for weight gain and health in general. Google Gary Taubes; he's done a great job of digging up and deconstructing a century's worth of research on the matter.
  - Evgeny 16y ago
    There is massive debate still going about the Taubes' arguments against 'calories in - calories out'. There is a lot of evidence in support of 'calories in - calories out' and it is way too early to conclude that if Taubes said so, it must be right.
    - khafra 16y ago
      The fact that there's a massive debate means we don't know enough about nutrition to legislatively micromanage it.

ciupicri 16y ago

Speaking of fat, you should have a look at the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet