{"id":8079,"date":"2016-06-05T01:43:23","date_gmt":"2016-06-05T05:43:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/?p=8079"},"modified":"2024-01-14T14:47:30","modified_gmt":"2024-01-14T19:47:30","slug":"racial-and-economic-patterns-in-the-consumption-of-sugary-drinks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/?p=8079","title":{"rendered":"Racial and Economic Patterns in the Consumption of Sugary Drinks"},"content":{"rendered":"

To: Members of City Council, Editorial Boards <\/span>and Opinion Writers<\/span><\/h4>\n

From: Marc Stier, Director, Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center<\/span><\/h4>\n

Date: June 5, 2016<\/span><\/h4>\n

Re: Racial and Economic Patterns in the Consumption of Sugary Drinks<\/span><\/h4>\n

The continuing debate about Mayor Kenney\u2019s proposal to tax sugary drinks is multi-faceted. We at the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center have expressed our support for the policy<\/a> on a variety of grounds. But here we want to address only one issue \u2013 an important misconception \u2013 about who consumes sugary drinks. <\/span><\/p>\n

A common theme of those who criticize the sugary drink tax is that it is doubly regressive. Critics say it is regressive first because, like all sales taxes, it takes a higher percentage of the income of those who have low incomes than those who have high incomes. And they say it is regressive, second, because those with low incomes and from ethnic and racial minorities consume sugary drinks at far higher rates than those with higher incomes and whites. <\/span><\/p>\n

It is the second kind of regressivity that has come to the fore in recent weeks. Opponents of the sugar drink tax have repeatedly said or implied that the tax is unfair because it taxes goods that are mainly consumed by Blacks or people with low-incomes. And the tax has been presented as an attempt by patronizing, elitist, mostly white people to change the behavior of low-income, mostly Black people who presumably don\u2019t know what is good for them. <\/span><\/p>\n

We would oppose any policy of that kind. However, the rigorous data we have about the consumption of sugary drinks does not support this picture<\/strong>. Rather, this view about the consumption of sugary drinks is mostly an urban myth that itself reflects racial biases. <\/span><\/p>\n

When we look at the evidence we find: <\/span><\/p>\n

1. Every community \u2013 White, Black and Latino; rich and poor \u2013 consumes a great deal of sugary drinks. Any differences in consumption between those communities pale in comparison to the across-the-board, high level of consumption in all communities. <\/span><\/p>\n

2. The research that purportedly shows that Blacks and Latinos consume sugary drinks at higher levels than Whites actually is far more complicated than it seems at first glance. There is some research that shows that a slightly higher percentage of Blacks and Latino consume sugary drinks than whites. But when one looks at how much is consumed, measured by the number of calories from sugary drinks per day, those differences disappear<\/strong>. Indeed, in some age groups, white people consume more calories from sugary drinks than black people. <\/span><\/p>\n

In addition, studies suggest that Blacks consume more sugar-sweetened fruit juice and less soda than Whites. This indicates a heightened concern with healthy consumption in the Black community. Because the sugary drink tax will raise prices of sugar-sweetened fruit juice, non-sweetened fruit juice will become more attractive, and local stores will have more incentive to stock them. Thus we can expect that the soda tax will lead to a greater decline in sugary drink consumption among Blacks than Whites.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

3. People with low-incomesare more likely to consume sugary drinks at higher levels than those with\u00a0<\/span>high income\u00a0, but the differences are (a) not that great because these drinks are consumed at <\/span>high level at all income levels, and (b) are almost certainly a product of the relative cost and availability of sugary drinks compared to other drinks. Thus the impact of a sugary drink tax is likely to reduce consumption more among those with low incomes than those with high incomes, both because sugary drinks will become relatively more expensive and because distributors will have more incentive to provide non-sugary drinks in low-income communities. <\/span><\/p>\n

One reason people may assume that Blacks, and especially those with low incomes, consume sugary drinks at far higher rates is that they do suffer from diabetes and cardiovascular disease at relatively high rates. But there are many causes of this disparity. The limited availability of high-quality foods of all kinds is one. And the stresses of living in a racist society itself contributes to health disparities. We shouldn\u2019t blame sugary drinks alone for the disparity in health problems. But reductions in the consumption of sugary drinks, along with other initiatives in place in the city, will contribute to reducing these far-too-high rates of diabetes and heart disease. <\/span><\/p>\n

To sum up: racial differences in the consumption of sugary drinks are far overstated<\/strong> and while class differences in the consumption of sugary drinks exist, they are not nearly as great as most people imagine and are almost entirely an economic, not a cultural phenomenon. The average American in all demographic and socio-economic groups consumes sugary drinks at higher rates than is good for them<\/strong>. The sugary drink tax is meant to reduce consumption across the board and is likely to strongly do so in low-income communities by raising their price and encouraging the availability of alternatives. <\/span><\/p>\n

The sugary drink tax is, of course, regressive. But because consumption patterns will change as a result of the tax it is not doubly regressive and the negative impact of the tax will be mitigated. Meanwhile, as we have pointed out<\/a>, the health benefits of the tax, as well as the benefits of pre-K education and community schools, will largely flow to those with lower incomes. (More sophisticated research has confirmed our claim<\/a> that the health benefits of the tax are dramatic and especially benefit those with low incomes.) <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Daily Consumption of Sugary Drinks By Racial and Income Groups<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
<\/td>\nPercentage who drink Sugary Drinks<\/span><\/td>\nKilocalories from Sugary Drinks<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Age 12-19<\/span><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic White<\/span><\/td>\n79.1<\/span><\/td>\n352<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic Black<\/span><\/td>\n86.4<\/span><\/td>\n318<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Hispanic<\/span><\/td>\n82.0<\/span><\/td>\n316<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 All<\/span><\/td>\n80.5<\/span><\/td>\n339<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Age 20-44<\/span><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic White<\/span><\/td>\n65.4<\/span><\/td>\n375<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic Black<\/span><\/td>\n77.9<\/span><\/td>\n349<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Hispanic<\/span><\/td>\n73.7<\/span><\/td>\n299<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 All<\/span><\/td>\n67.6<\/span><\/td>\n362<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Source: Sara N. Bleich and Julia A. Wolfson. U.S. adults and child snacking patterns among sugar-sweetened beverage drinkers and non-drinkers Preventive Medicine 72 (2015) 8\u201314<\/span><\/p>\n

Data from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2010<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n<\/strong>Daily Kilocalories from sugary drinks by racial and and income groups<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\nPer-capita kilocalories<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Age 12-19<\/span><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic White<\/span><\/td>\n302<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic Black<\/span><\/td>\n297<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Mexican American<\/span><\/td>\n305<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Low Income<\/span><\/td>\n325<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 High Income<\/span><\/td>\n297<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Age 20-44<\/span><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic White<\/span><\/td>\n251<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic Black<\/span><\/td>\n235<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Mexican American<\/span><\/td>\n225<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Low Income<\/span><\/td>\n256<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 High Income<\/span><\/td>\n232<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Age 45-64<\/span><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic White<\/span><\/td>\n150<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Non-Hispanic Black<\/span><\/td>\n205<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Mexican American<\/span><\/td>\n128<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 Low Income<\/span><\/td>\n184<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\u00a0 High Income<\/span><\/td>\n150<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Sources: Y. Claire Wang,\u00a0Sara N. Bleich,\u00a0and Steven L. Gortmaker. Increasing Caloric Contribution From Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and 100% Fruit Juices Among US Children and Adolescents, 1988\u20132004. Pediatrics<\/a>, June 2008, VOLUME 121 \/ ISSUE 6<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Sara N Bleich, Y Claire Wang, Youfa Wang, and Steven L Gortmaker, Increasing consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages among US adults: 1988\u20131994 to 1999\u20132004 The<\/em> American Journal of Clinical Nutrition<\/em>, 2009;89:372\u201381.<\/span><\/p>\n

Data from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2004<\/span><\/p>\n

In both pieces, the line between low and high income is 130% of the federal poverty line.<\/span><\/p>\n

See also: Kumar, G. S., M.D., Pan, L., M.D., Park, S., PhD., Lee-Kwan, S., Onufrak, S., PhD., & Blanck, H. M., PhD. (2014).\u00a0Sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among adults – 18 states, 2012.\u00a0(). Atlanta: U.S. Center for Disease Control. Retrieved from http:\/\/www.library.drexel.edu\/cgi-bin\/r.cgi\/login?url=http:\/\/search.proquest.com\/docview\/1555349121?accountid=10559<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Brian K Kit, Tala HI Fakhouri, Sohyun Park, Samara Joy Nielsen, and Cynthia L Ogden, Trends in sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among youth and adults in the United States. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition<\/em>, 1999\u201320101\u20134<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

To: Members of City Council, Editorial Boards and Opinion Writers From: Marc Stier, Director, Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center Date: June 5, 2016 Re: Racial and Economic Patterns in the Consumption of Sugary Drinks The continuing debate about Mayor Kenney\u2019s proposal to tax sugary drinks is multi-faceted. We at the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center have expressed our support for the policy on a variety of grounds. But here we want to address only one issue \u2013 an important misconception \u2013 about who consumes sugary drinks. A common theme of those who criticize the sugary drink tax is that it is doubly regressive. Critics say it is regressive first because, like all sales taxes, it takes a higher percentage of the income of those who have low incomes than those who have high incomes. And they say it is regressive, second, because those with low incomes and from ethnic and\u2026 Continue reading<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[207,197,168],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p35YuU-26j","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8079"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=8079"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8079\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10645,"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8079\/revisions\/10645"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=8079"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=8079"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcstier.com\/blog2\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=8079"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}