The WHO has 3 recommendations "to promote healthy diets"

(1)

"WHO recommends implementation of a policy to tax sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs).
(Strong recommendation)"

What does the WHO mean by "SSBs"?

They mean:
"For this recommendation, ‘SSBs’ refers to all types of non-alcoholic beverages containing free sugars,1 including carbonated and non-carbonated soft drinks, fruit and vegetable juices2 and drinks, nectars, liquid and powder concentrates, flavoured waters, vitamin waters, energy and sports drinks, readyto-drink teas, ready-to-drink coffees, flavoured milks and milk-based drinks, and plant-based milk substitutes."

What does reference 2 say?
"2 None of the policies in the evidence base for this recommendation included 100% fruit juices as a taxable product. However, reducing consumption of fruit juices could contribute to reducing overall sugars intake because of the sugars content of fruit juices."

My comment:
Weirdly, the WHO does not take into account quantity of sugar and all-over expected health effect. Is a Red Bull drink or Coca Cola comparable to a vanilla or chocolate soya milk or even a moderately sweetened plain soya milk or plain soya yoghurt? Answer: not at all. So, why does the WHO not differentiate? Several highly speculative reply options come to mind:
  • They might intentionally want to mislead people by blurring the lines (e.g., because they are corrupt and have received money from Coca Cola).
  • They are ignorant of the differences.
  • They don't want to step on anyone's toes (e.g., big corporations - who might have them assassinated; or governments - but which government depends on Coca Cola sales?
  • They hate plant-based drinks and/or vegetable juices (for some reason, e.g., being highly politically conservative, anti-health food, ...).
  • "God" knows why.
While these "reply options" sound very speculative and partly a bit conspiracy-minded, there must be some reason the WHO is blurring the lines between Coca Cola and carrot juice, between Red Bull and Alpro sugar-sweetened plain soya drink.

If you know the real, true answer, do let me know, please.

Side note: "The WHO guideline on sugars intake recommends reducing children’s and adults’ intake of free sugars to less than 10% of total energy intake [...]". Concrete example: I have a sugar-sweetened vanilla-flavoured soya yoghurt (500 g) in my fridge right now. It's sold by Aldi (major supermarket chain, Germany) and contains 38 g of sugar (sucrose) per 500 g. 38 g of sugar are 152 kcal, which in turn would be 7.6% of a 2000 kcal per day diet. I eat more than 2000 kcal per day, but even a person with a relatively small body height or a relatively low level of physical activity (which is not recommended), could happily eat one 500 g of sugary soya yoghurt every day, in addition to an otherwise whole food-based vegan diet, and easily stay clearly below the WHO's upper level.
Well, how about a plain soya yoghurt, not the sugar-free ones but the less sugary than vanilla or berry flavoured ones? Alpro (being the largest company of their kind in Europe) has one that has 2.1 g of sugar 100 g of yoghurt. It has a NutriScore "A" (the best out of A to D). One unit, i.e., one yoghurt pot (or yoghurt cup for "USA folks"), contains only 400 g (they downsized to make more cash). That is, one 400 g yoghurt contains 8.4 g of sugar, which provides 34 kcal, which in turn would be 1.7% of a 2000 kcal/day diet. In other words, you could eat more than 5 of these mildly sweetened soya yoghurts per day, in addition to an otherwise whole foods-based diet, and still stay below the WHO "10% of kcal as sugar" cut-off. 
How about the Alpro soya drink "original", which is mildly sugar-sweetened (not sugar-free but still less sugary than vanilla etc.)? Again, it has a NutriScore "A" and contains 25 g of sugar per 1 litre of soya milk, which means 100 kcal as sugar. This in turn means that drinking 1 litre of this soya milk per day would contribute 5% of a 2000 kcal diet, again easily staying below the 10% cut-off. AND, soya drinks like all plant-based "milks" and sweet potatoes (at least in Germany - Germany and its crazy laws!) - in contrast to soya yoghurts (!) - are already punished with a higher value-added tax (VAT), i.e., 19% instead of the usual 7% for most foods (including plant-based yoghurts).

Moral of the story:
Governments, big shots all over, and the everyday Joe Sixpack should demand the WHO to stop messing about.


(2)

"WHO suggests implementation of a policy to tax foods that do not contribute to a healthy diet. (Conditional recommendation)"

Well, which "foods" do they mean?

They mean:
"Foods that do not contribute to a healthy diet are those that are high in saturated fatty acids, trans-fatty acids, free sugars and/or salt and/or which contain non-sugar sweeteners, and which are usually highly processed, and/or the consumption of which is associated with negative health outcomes."

How about just saying Coca Cola and processed meats? 

But who can say the WHO is not brave and daring? They state: "The recommendation [above] was further supported by evidence on [...] the potential for the intervention to increase equity and support human rights."

Let us remember that the WHO is a United Nations organization and that the United Nations is a conglomeration of 190+ countries which include "all sorts". Many of these countries are not just drenched in Coca Cola (and increasing Red Bull and other "toxic sludge", my words not the WHO's) but also many countries that have a strong aversion to human rights. The WHO report actually has 25 mentions of "human rights".
They even have a guiding question along with it: "Is the intervention in accordance with human rights standards, and what is the impact of the intervention on human rights (including the ability to make a competent, informed and voluntary decision)?"

As one may expect, they do not make a single mention of animal welfare or extreme cruelty to animals - as if it was a nonissue. But again, we need to remember what the United Nations are.


(3)

"WHO suggests implementation of a policy to subsidize foods that contribute to a healthy diet. (Conditional recommendation)"

Which foods would that be?
WHO says: "Foods that contribute to a healthy diet are those that are nutrient-dense, rich in naturally occurring fibre and/or unsaturated fatty acids, low in saturated fatty acids, trans-fatty acids, free sugars and/or salt, free of non-sugar sweeteners, and/or the consumption of which is associated with positive health outcomes."

This is sufficiently vague to make any ultra-conservative sleep soundly. Finding any consensus within the United Nations on what a healthy diet is must be as impossible as discussing animal liberation with [fill the blank]. But how about vegetables? Can't all nations agree on vegetables? And let's say tahini? 

The cover of their report suggests that they consider the following to be health-promoting: vegetables, some fruit and whole grains as well as eggs and fish. 



Final note:

Interestingly, many countries already have started with such a taxation of unhealthy foods scheme: "as of February 2024, 115 Member States2 have implemented SSB taxes at a national level, and three countries at a subnational or municipal level (Fig. 1), while 41 Member States3 have implemented national-level taxes on a variety of food categories (Fig. 2)".

Check out their figures 1 and 2. The latter group of countries include (my random selection) Mexico, Cuba, Colombia, Brazil, Uruguay, Denmark, Norway, Hungary, Tunisia, Pakistan, and India.

This can go wrong, too. Rumour has it that in Mexico, for example, "peanut butter and hazelnut butter" are subject to an additional "junk food" tax, whereas ice cream is not [Batis et al. 2016, USDA 2014]. If this also applies to unsweetened peanut and hazelnut butter (because they are calorie-dense), this would obviously be nonsense.

Understandably, leading politicians in "Western" countries aren't keen on taking a lead and making even more enemies among their (if you don't mind me saying, shitty) voting public.





Reference:

WHO 2024: Fiscal policies to promote healthy diets: WHO guideline, 14 June 2024, ISBN: 978-92-4-009101-6, https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240091016



Decoration: