Searching for Public Health Law’s Sweet Spot: The Regulation of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages

1. New York City Health Code § 81.53.

2. Grynbaum MM, Connelly M. Sixty percent in City oppose Bloomberg’s soda ban, poll finds. New York Times. 23 August 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/23/nyregion/most-new-yorkers-oppose-bloombergs-soda-ban.html?_r=0. Accessed 27 August 2014.

3. Gollust SE, Barry CL, Niederdeppe J (2014). Americans’ opinions about policies to reduce consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages. Prev Med. 63:52–57. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.03.002 24631499

4. Mello MM, Studdert DM (2014). Making the case for health-enhancing laws after Bloomberg. Hast Ctr Rep. Jan-Feb 44(1). doi: 10.1002/hast.246

5. Grynbaum MM. Judge blocks New York City’s limits on big sugary drinks. New York Times, 11 March 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/12/nyregion/judge-invalidates-bloombergs-soda-ban.html?hp. Accessed 27 August 2014.

6. New Yorkers for Beverage Choices. http://nycbeveragechoices.com/. Accessed: 27 August 2014.

7. New York Statewide Coalition of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. New York City Dept. of Health, No. 653684/2012, 2013 WL 1343607 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. March 11, 2013).

8. New York Statewide Coalition of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. New York City Dept. of Health, 23 N.Y.3d 681 (2014).

9. Malik VS, Pan A, Willett WC, Hu FB (2013). Sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain in children and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 98:1084–102. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.058362 23966427

10. Malik VS, Schulze MB, Hu FB (2006). Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr. 84:274–88. 16895873

11. Vartanian LR, Schwartz MB, Brownell KD (2007). Effects of soft drink consumption on nutrition and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Pub Health. 97:667–75.

12. Brownell KD, Farley T, Willett WC, Popkin BM, Chaloupka FJ, et al (2009). The public health and economic benefits of taxing sugar-sweetened beverages. N Engl J Med. 361:1599–1605. doi: 10.1056/NEJMhpr0905723 19759377

13. Chriqui FJ, Chaloupka FJ, Powell LM, Edison SS (2013). A typology of beverage taxation: Multiple approaches for obesity prevention and obesity prevention-related revenue generation. J Pub Health Pol. 34:403–423.

14. Pidd H, Hawke. Innocent loses fight over VAT charged on smoothies—but not raw fruit. The Guardian. 22 November 2010. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/nov/22/innocent-smoothies-challenge-vat-ruling. Accessed December 4, 2014.

15. Thow AM, Quested C, Juventin L, Kun R, Khan AN, et al (2010). Taxing soft drinks in the Pacific: implementation lessons for improving health. Health Promot Int’l. 26(1):55–64.

16. Mytton O, Rayner M. Health Related Food Taxes and Subsidies, BHF Health Promotion Research Group, University of Oxford. http://www.aomrc.org.uk/doc_view/9578-british-heart-foundation-health-promotion-research-group-dept-of-public-health-oxford. Accessed 27 August 2014.

17. Briggs A (2013). Overall and income specific effect on prevalence of overweight and obesity of 20% sugar-sweetened drink tax in UK: econometric and comparative risk assessment modeling study. BMJ. 347: f6189. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f6189 24179043

18. Powell LM, Chriqui JF, Khan T, Wada R, and Chaloupka FJ (2013). Assessing the potential effectiveness of food and beverage taxes and subsidies for improving public health: a systematic review of prices, demand and body weight outcomes. Obesity Rev. 14:110–128.

19. Mytton OT, Clarke D, Rayner M (2012). Taxing unhealthy food and drinks to improve health. BMJ. 344:e2931. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e2931 22589522

20. Chaloupka FJ, Powell LM, Chriqui JF (2011). Sugar-sweetened beverages and obesity: the potential impact of public policies. J Pol’y Anal Mgmt. 30:644–665.

21. Buhler S, Raine KD, Arango M, Pellerin S, Neary NE (2013). Building a strategy for obesity prevention one piece at a time: the case of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation. Can J Diabet. 37(2):97–102.

22. Waterlander WE, Mhurchu CN, Steenhuis IHM (2014). Effects of a price increase on purchases of sugar sweetened beverages. Results from a randomized controlled trial. Appetite. 78:32–39. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2014.03.012 24667153

23. Knight H. Why Berkeley passed a soda tax and S.F. didn’t. San Francisco Chronicle. November 7, 2014. http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Why-Berkeley-passed-a-soda-tax-and-S-F-didn-t-5879757.php.

24. Washington Post Editors. Council all but kills soda tax. Washington Post. 20 May 2010. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dc/2010/05/council_all_but_kills_soda_tax.html. Accessed 27 August 2014.

25. Hartocollis A. Failure of state soda tax plan reflects power of an antitax message. New York Times, July 2, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/03/nyregion/03sodatax.html?_r=0. Accessed 27 August 2014.

26. Kamerow D (2010). The case of the sugar sweetened beverage tax. BMJ. 341:c3719. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c3719 20630952

27. Jou J, Niederdeppe J, Barry CL, Gollust SE (2014). Strategic messaging to promote taxation of sugar-sweetened beverages: lessons from recent political campaigns. Am J Pub Health. 104:847–53.

28. Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity. Sugar-sweetened beverage initiatives since 2009. Jan. 2013. http://yaleruddcenter.org/resources/upload/docs/what/policy/SSBtaxes/SSB_Initiatives_since_2009.pdf Accessed 27 August 2014.

29. Steinmetz K. Big soda fights Bay Area tax proposals. Time. Nov 3, 2014. http://time.com/3552008/soda-tax-san-francisco-berkeley/ Accessed 12 May 2015.

30. Bauerlein V, McKay B. Soda tax uncaps a fight. Wall Street Journal. May 23, 2010. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704904604575262530291194198 Accessed 12 May 2015.

31. Hawkes C (2010). The worldwide battle against soft drinks in schools. Am J Prev Med. 38:457–61. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.01.011 20307815

32. Mello MM, Pomeranz J, Moran P (2008). The interplay of public health law and industry self-regulation: the case of sugar-sweetened beverage sales in schools. Am J Pub Health. 98(4):595–604.

33. National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program—Nutrition Standards for All Foods Sold in Schools as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010; Interim final rule. Fed Regist. June 28, 2013;78(125): 39068–39120.

34. Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Powell LM, Chaloupka FJ (2012). Banning all sugar-sweetened beverages in middle schools: reduction of in-school access and purchasing but not overall consumption. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 166(3):256–262. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.200 22064875

35. Fletcher JM, Friswold D, Tefft N (2010). Taxing soft drinks and restricting access to vending machines to curb child obesity. Health Aff. 29:1059–66.

36. Institute of Medicine (2013). Challenges and opportunities for change in food marketing to children and youth: workshop summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

37. World Health Organization (2004). Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health. 2004. http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/strategy/eb11344/strategy_english_web.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 27 August 2014.

38. World Health Organization (2006). Marketing of food and non-alcoholic beverages to children: report of a WHO forum and technical meeting. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2006. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2006/9241594918_eng.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 27 August 2014.

39. Institute of Medicine (2006). Food marketing to children and youth: threat or opportunity? Washington, DC: National Academies Press. 16989035

40. Nutritional health warnings: just for show. Prescrire Int 2007;16 (92):261. http://english.prescrire.org/en/80/160/46239/0/PositionDetails.aspx. Accessed 27 August 2014.

41. Hawkes C (2007). Marketing food to children: changes in the global regulatory environment 2004–2006. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2007. http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/regulatory_environment_CHawkes07.pdf. Accessed 17 August 2014.

42. Hawkes C. Marketing food to children: the global regulatory environment. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2004. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2004/9241591579.pdf. Accessed 14 August 2014.

43. Oommen VG, Anderson PJ (2008). Policies on restriction of food advertising during children’s television viewing times: an international perspective. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/13646/1/Policies_on_Food_Advertising.pdf. Accessed 27 August 2014.

44. White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity (2010). Solving the problem of childhood obesity within a generation: White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity report to the President. May 2010. http://www.letsmove.gov/sites/letsmove.gov/files/TaskForce_on_Childhood_Obesity_May2010_FullReport.pdf. Accessed 27 August 2014.

45. Interagency Working Group on Food Marketing to Children (2011). Preliminary proposed nutrition principles to guide industry self-regulatory efforts. https://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/IWG_food_marketing_proposed_guidelines_4.11.pdf Accessed 27 August 2014.

46. Dietz WH (2013). New strategies to improve food marketing to children. Health Aff. 32:1652–58.

47. Mello MM (2010). Federal Trade Commission regulation of food advertising to children: possibilities for a reinvigorated role. J Health Polit Pol’y Law. 35(2):227–76.

48. Jaime PC, da Silva CF, Gentil PC, Claro RM, Monteiro CA (2013). Brazilian obesity prevention and control initiatives. Obes Rev. 14(Suppl. 2): 88–95. doi: 10.1111/obr.12101 24102701

49. Berman ML (2013). Commercial speech law and tobacco marketing: a comparative discussion of the United States and Canada. Am J Law Med. 39(2–3):218–36. 23815029

50. Irwin Toy Ltd. v. Attorney General of Quebec, [1989] 1 SCR 927.

51. European Union Regulation No. 1169/2011. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1418204194755&uri=CELEX%3A02011R1169-20140219. Accessed 13 May 2015.

52. US Food and Drug Administration (2014). 21 CFR Part 101 (May 27 2014). http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2004-N-0258-0006 Accessed 27 August 2014/

53. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, P.L. 111–148, sec. 4205 (2010).

54. Sinclair SE, Cooper M, Mansfield ED (2014). The influence of menu labeling on calories selected or consumed: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Acad Nutr Dietetics. 114(9):1375–88.

55. UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2011). Guidance on government buying standards for food and catering services. http://sd.defra.gov.uk/documents/GBS-guidance-food.pdf. Accessed 27 August 2014.

56. Gov. Deval L. Patrick, Exec. Ord. 509 (MA 2009). http://www.mass.gov/courts/docs/lawlib/eo500-599/eo509.pdf Accessed 27 August 2014.

57. Mass in Motion. Massachusetts State Agency Food Standards. http://www.mass.gov/eohhs/docs/dph/com-health/nutrition-phys-activity/eo509-state-agency-food-standards.pdf. Accessed 27 August 2014.

58. Brownell KD, Ludwig DS (2011). The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, soda, and USDA policy: who benefits? JAMA. 306:1370–71. doi: 10.1001/jama.2011.1382 21954481

59. Barnhill A (2011). Impact and ethics of excluding sweetened beverages from the SNAP program. Am J Pub Health. 101:2037–43.

60. Fernandes MM (2012). Effect of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) on frequency of beverage consumption among youth in the United States. J Acad Nutr Diet. 112:1241–46. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2012.03.033 22682882

61. Niederdeppe J, Gollust SE, Jarlenski MP, Nathanson AM, Barry CL (2013). News coverage of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes: pro- and antitax arguments in public discourse. Am J Pub Health. 103(6):e92–e98.

62. Health Be Damned: Denmark hopes cheaper soda will boost economy. Spiegel International, Apr. 23, 2013. http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/denmark-to-repeal-tax-on-soda-and-beer-to-limit-cross-border-shopping-a-895857.html. Accessed 27 August 2014.

63. Barnhill A, King KF (2013). Evaluating equity critiques in food policy: the case of sugar-sweetened beverages. J Law Med Ethics. 41(1):301–9. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12020 23581672

64. Stier J (2013). With its soda tax, Mexico repeats the mistakes of Mayor Bloomberg. Forbes, 10 October 2013. http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/10/10/with-its-soda-tax-mexico-repeats-the-mistakes-of-mayor-bloomberg/. Accessed 27 August 2014.

65. Zhen C, Finkelstein EA, Nonnemaker J, Karns S, Todd JE (2013). Predicting the effects of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes on food and beverage demand in a large demand system. Am J Agric Econ. 96(1):1–25.

66. Finkelstein EA, Zhen C, Bilger M, Nonnemaker J, Farooqui AM, et al (2013). Implications of a sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax when substitutions to non-beverage items are considered. J Health Econ. 32:219–39. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2012.10.005 23202266

67. Cabrera Escobar MA, Veerman JL, Tollman SM, Bertram MY, Hofman KJ (2013). Evidence that a tax on sugar sweetened beverages reduces the obesity rate: a meta-analysis. BMC Pub Health. 13:1072.

68. Wilson BM, Stolarz-Fantino S, Fantino E (2013). Regulating the way to obesity: unintended consequences of limiting sugary drink sizes. PLoS ONE. 8(4):e61081. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061081 23593397

69. The Coca-Cola Company (2011). Our position on obesity—including supporting science and facts, Sept. 2011. http://assets.coca-colacompany.com/c2/a7/2f6eab904c7cbf3fcbc0646bd988/Our%20Position%20on%20Obesity.pdf. Accessed: 27 August 2014.

70. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR (2008). Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.

71. Stuckler D, McKee M, Ebrahim S, Basu S (2012). Manufacturing epidemics: the role of global producers in increased consumption of unhealthy commodities including processed foods, alcohol, and tobacco. PLoS Med. 9(6):e1001235. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001235 22745605

72. Basu S, McKee M, Galea G, Stuckler D (2013). Relationship of soft drink consumption to global overweight, obesity, and diabetes: a cross-national analysis of 75 countries. Am J Pub Health. 103:2071–77.

73. Monteiro CA, Cannon G (2012). The impact of transnational “Big Food” companies on the South: a view from Brazil. PLoS Med. 9(7):e1001252. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001252 22802732

74. Euromonitor International. Global soft drink market grows 2.1% despite rising health concerns, 5 February 2014. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/05/idUSnMKWMx6N2a+1e4+MKW20140205 Accessed 27 August 2014.

75. Mello MM, Cohen IG (2012). The taxing power and the public’s health. N Engl J Med. 367:1777–9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1209648 23075142

76. Basu S, Vellakkal S, Agrawal S, Stuckler D, Popkin B, et al (2014). Averting obesity and type 2 diabetes in India through sugar-sweetened beverage taxation: an economic-epidemiologic modeling study. PLoS Med. 11(1):e1001582. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001582 24409102

77. Bogart WA (2013). Law as a tool in “the war on obesity”: useful interventions, maybe, but first, what’s the problem? J Law Med & Ethics. 41(1):28–41.

78. Goldin J (2012). Sales tax not included: designing commodity taxes for inattentive consumers. Yale Law J. 122(1):258–301.

79. Pomeranz JL (2012). Advanced policy options to regulate sugar-sweetened beverages to support public health. J Pub Health Pol’y. 33(1):75–88.

80. Field Research Corporation. The Field Poll, Release #2436, 14 February 2013. http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2436.pdf Accessed 27 August 2014.

81. Morain S, Mello MM (2013). Survey finds public support for legal interventions directed at health behavior to fight noncommunicable disease. Health Aff. 32:486–496.