While it is difficult for a dentist to disagree with the central thrust of your editorial ("Time to take more of the fizz out of the family diet", The Herald, October 25), it missed the key issue as did the article ("Fizzy drinks are linked to increased teen violence", October 25) and indeed the original study which led to it.
In a recent study we found that teenagers in Scotland from deprived areas have a seven-times-greater risk of alcohol-related facial injuries than those from more affluent neighbourhoods.
This over-riding determinant of social and economic circumstances at the individual, family, and area level and the associated inequalities, was not even considered in the US research on fizzy drinks and violence.
A major problem with this kind of study is the concern that the finding is “confounded” – that is, fizzy drinks are associated both with the real determinant (social factors) and outcome (violence) but not necessarily in the pathway.
Nevertheless, fizzy drinks are highly consumed in Scotland and are associated with our substantial obesity, dental decay and other ill-health levels.
In the same way the Scottish Government is pursuing more active policies and levers to address the alcohol problem (via minimum pricing), further serious consideration needs to be given to taxing fizzy drinks (as proposed by Richard Simpson in a recent motion in the Scottish Parliament, entitle Vive la France, which highlighted similar action on fizzy drinks in France ). However, tackling our health problems will only ever be achieved when we tackle our shameful social and economic inequalities, which are the real determinants – the causes of the causes –of our poor health record.
David Conway,
Clinical Senior Lecturer in Dental Public Health,
University of Glasgow Dental School
378 Sauchiehall Street,
Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article