Skip to main content
. 2021 Jan 28;8:591696. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.591696

Table 3.

Potential impact 1 year after the implementation of the NEDF tax on overweight and obesity prevalence by sociodemographic characteristics using the Dynamic Childhood Growth and Obesity Modela.

Overweight Obesity
Without tax [% (95% CI)] With tax [% (95% CI)] Absolute difference (pp) Without tax [% (95% CI)] With tax [% (95% CI)] Absolute difference (pp)
Total 21.2 (19,23) 19.4 (18,22) −1.7 (−0.80,−2.5) 13.8 (12,15) 13.4 (11,15) −0.4 (−0.10,−0.60)
AGE GROUPS
School-aged children 21.5 (19, 24) 19.6 (17, 22) −1.8 (−0.80, −2.7) 13.6 (12, 16) 13.1 (11, 15) −0.4 (−0.10, −0.80)
Adolescent 20.7 (18, 24) 19.1 (16, 22) −1.5 (−0.10, −3.0) 14.1 (11, 18) 13.9 (11, 18) −0.2 (−0.10, −0.40)
SEX
Male 20.6 (18, 24) 18.7 (16, 22) −1.9 (−0.50, −3.1) 16.2 (13, 19) 15.6 (13, 18) −0.5 (−0.10, −0.90)
Female 21.7 (19, 25) 20.2 (17, 23) −1.5 (−0.40, −2.4) 11.4 (9.6, 13) 11.2 (9, 13) −0.2 (−0.10, −0.40)
SOCIOECONOMIC STATUSb
Low 23.7 (20, 27) 22.1 (19, 26) −1.9 (−0.80, −2.9) 11.3 (9, 14) 10.8 (9, 13) −0.6 (−0.01, −1.0)
Medium 20.3 (17, 24) 17.7 (15, 21) −2.6 (−0.60, −4.6) 13.7 (11, 17) 13.2 (11, 16) −0.5 (−0.12, −0.96)
High 19.4 (16, 23) 19.4 (16, 23) 0.0 (0.0, 0.0) 16.1 (13, 19) 16.1 (13, 19) 0.0 (0.0, 0.0)
a

The Dynamic Childhood Growth and Obesity Model (DCGO) was used to obtain a no intervention (without tax) and a tax scenario (with tax) for body weight using a 1-year simulation time frame; the absolute difference is the expected impact of the NEDF tax on overweight and obesity.

b

Body weight simulated under the tax, assumed an average reduction of 5.1% in non-essential energy-dense food (NEDF) consumption at the individual level. To obtain differences by SES, we used the effects stratified as follows: 10.2, 5.8, and 0% for low, medium, and high SES, respectively (15).

BMI, body mass index; NEDF, non-essential energy-dense foods; SE, standard error; pp, percentage points.