Contact Us

Tag: press release

Clear warnings help people act before hypertension becomes a lifelong illness

Posted on by Zukiswa Zimela

South Africa is facing a growing burden of hypertension and other non-communicable diseases,  Ahead of World Hypertension Day, HEALA is calling for stronger food labelling policies, including clear and effective front-of-pack warning labels, to help consumers make informed choices and reduce excessive salt consumption.

Hypertension, commonly known as high blood pressure, remains one of the leading risk factors for heart disease, stroke, kidney disease, and premature death in South Africa. Despite ongoing public awareness campaigns, many consumers still struggle to identify foods high in salt, sugar, and unhealthy fats due to complicated nutrition labels and misleading marketing on packaged foods.

Front-of-pack warning labels offer a practical, evidence-based solution. By placing simple to read, highly visible warnings on products that contain excessive levels of nutrients linked to poor health outcomes, such as sodium, these labels empower consumers to make healthier choices quickly and confidently.

South Africa has already demonstrated leadership in public health through progressive policies such as salt reduction regulations.  In 2023 government released for public comment the R3777 Regulations Relating to the Labelling And Advertising of Food Stuff, in acknowledgement of the fact that  stronger consumer information tools are needed to improve the overall health of South Africans, particularly as processed and ultra-processed foods become more common in household diets.

Three years later the regulations have yet to be implemented. 

Research from countries like Chile, that have implemented front-of-pack warning labels shows that these measures can influence purchasing decisions, encourage manufacturers to reformulate products, and improve public understanding of nutrition risks.

South Africa has low nutrition label literacy. A 2011 study in the North West reported that “respondents did not always understand how to use the information on food labels in order to make informed food choices. When scientists quizzed study participants on how well they understood labels, test scores revealed that even frequent readers did not always understand how to use labels to make better food choices.

For South Africa where hypertension affects millions of adults and increasingly impacts younger populations pack warning labels represent an important opportunity to strengthen prevention efforts, reduce healthcare costs, and protect future generations.

HEALA is urging policymakers to ratify mandatory front-of-pack warning labels as part of a comprehensive strategy to combat hypertension and improve nutrition across the country. 

South Africans have a right to know what is in their food. Clear warning labels are not just about information they are about prevention, empowerment, and saving lives.

The Health Promotion Levy Is a Food Justice and Human Rights Imperative, Not a Tax on the Poor

Posted on by Zukiswa Zimela

Johannesburg, South Africa, 23 January. With Minister of Finance Enoch Godongwana set to deliver his Budget Vote on 25 February, civil society organisations — the Healthy Living Alliance (HEALA), Grow Great (GG), Treatment Action Campaign (TAC), and other members of the Food Justice Coalition (FJC) reiterate strong support for South Africa’s Health Promotion Levy (HPL), emphasising that the levy is a proven human rights-based policy tool that protects lives, reduces inequality, and advances the constitutional right of access to health care services.

As pressure mounts from industry groups to weaken or repeal the HPL, we warn that rolling back the levy would undermine progress in addressing hunger, diet-related disease and the growing burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs), which disproportionately affect low-income communities.

Non-communicable diseases account for approximately 51% of all deaths in South Africa, with diabetes now the second leading natural cause of death nationally (Stats SA). Oral diseases continue to contribute to significant global and national morbidity and disability, with over 3.7 billion people impacted globally. Nationally, 1 in 4 (27.9%), people aged 5 years and above experienced untreated dental decay and 24.5% of persons over the age of 15 experienced severe gum diseases (leading to preventable and premature tooth loss) both of these disease having a significant, but often overlooked impact on health and quality of life.  Excess body weight affects around 68% of women and 31% of men in South Africa, while childhood overweight and obesity rates are among the highest in sub-Saharan Africa.

The HPL Is Not Harmful to Poor Households

“Framing the Health Promotion Levy as harmful to poor households is not only misleading, but deeply cynical,” said Nzama Mbalati, CEO at HEALA. “Low-income communities already pay the highest price for unhealthy food environments through preventable illness, lost income and avoidable deaths.”

Since its introduction in 2018 at a rate of 11% (2.1 cents per gram of sugar above 4g/100ml), peer-reviewed research has shown that the HPL led to a 29% reduction in sugar purchased from taxable beverages among lower-income households, alongside significant product reformulation by manufacturers.

From a revenue perspective, the HPL has generated approximately R2 billion per year in its early years of implementation. If increased to 20% in line with World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations, revenue could increase substantially while maximising public health impact. WHO recommends that sugary drink taxes raise retail prices by at least 20% to meaningfully reduce consumption.

Moreover, the potential to earmark HPL revenue for health promotion, nutrition programmes and food security interventions offers a direct opportunity to support vulnerable communities” says Mbalati.

A Rights-Based Response to an Unjust Food System

South Africa faces a dual crisis of hunger and obesity, driven by a food system that makes ultra-processed, sugary products cheap and widely available while healthier options remain unaffordable for many households.

 Recent national data indicates that one in four South African children under five experiences stunting, while at the same time sugary beverage consumption remains high, particularly among adolescents. Excessive sugar intake is a major contributor to diabetes, dental decay,  heart disease and stroke, conditions that place immense strain on families and the public health system. The International Diabetes Federation estimates that over 4.2 million adults in South Africa are living with diabetes, with many more undiagnosed. Diabetes-related complications significantly increase public healthcare expenditure and reduce household income due to disability and premature mortality.

Public health evidence, including local studies evaluating the HPL, shows that the levy has shifted consumer purchasing behaviour toward beverages with less sugar and incentivised industry reformulation without the large-scale job losses predicted by industry opponents.

Supporting Farmers Through Just Transition

We note with concern that local farmers are affected by uncertainty in the global sugar industry. The supply chain faces high production costs, shrinking markets and changing consumer behaviour.

For long-term sustainability, government and farmers must work collaboratively to pivot away from sugar dependency through a just transition framework.

One promising approach involves creating opportunities for farmers to supply affordable, nutritious produce to Early Childhood Development (ECD) centres nationwide. Government-facilitated farmer-ECD partnerships would support farmer livelihoods while improving child nutrition outcomes.

Debunking the “Tax on the Poor” Narrative

HEALA and Union Against Hunger stress that the claim that the HPL unfairly targets poor households ignores the lived reality of diet-related disease.

Lower-income communities experience disproportionately high rates of obesity and diabetes, yet face reduced access to preventative healthcare and early screening services. Evidence shows that lower-income households also benefit most from reductions in sugary beverage consumption following price increases.

“The real injustice is allowing an aggressive sugary drinks market to continue targeting children and low-income communities with impunity,” added Tendai Mafuma, Senior Legal Researcher at SECTION27. “Weakening the HPL would be a direct betrayal of the government’s constitutional obligations.”

A Call to Protect and Strengthen the HPL

We call on National Treasury and policymakers to:

  • Reject industry-driven attempts to weaken or repeal the Health Promotion Levy.
  • Increase the levy in line with global best practice to maximise health impact (minimum 20% price increase as recommended by WHO).
  • Commit to investing HPL revenue in health promotion, nutrition and food security programmes.
  • Place food justice and human rights at the centre of fiscal and health policy decision-making.

“At a time of rising hunger, inequality and preventable disease, South Africa cannot afford policy capture by vested interests,” says Dr. Edzani Mphaphuli, Executive Director at Grow Great .“The Health Promotion Levy is not the problem , it is part of the solution.”

ENDS

For media enquiries and Interviews, please contact:

Mr. Neo Merafi

Maverick Brand Communications 

neo@maverickbrand.co.za

WhatsApp: 071 359 9738

OR

Ms. Zukiswa Zimela 

Communications Manager- HEALA 

zukiswa@heala.org

WhatsApp: 074 521 0652  

Notes to Editors (Updated)

  • The Health Promotion Levy was introduced in April 2018.
  • The levy taxes sugary beverages containing more than 4g of sugar per 100ml.
  • Non-communicable diseases account for approximately 51% of deaths in South Africa.
  • Diabetes is the second leading natural cause of death nationally.
  • Peer-reviewed research shows a 29% reduction in sugar purchased from taxable beverages among lower-income households after implementation.
  • WHO recommends sugary drink taxes increase prices by at least 20% to achieve optimal public health impact.
  • The HPL allocation to the NDoH has remained largely unspent for the past 10 years. For the 2025/2026 fiscal year, only R15 million of the allocated R52 million has been earmarked, and this for a limited number of organisations — namely Park Run, the National Organ Donation Foundation, the National Cancer Registry, and the Knowledge Translation Unit (KTU) at UCT.

HEALA pushes back against the recent ruling by the Advertising Regulatory Board 

Posted on by Zukiswa Zimela

PRESS RELEASE

IMMEDIATE: 08 SEPTEMBER 2025 

HEALA (Healthy Living Alliance), a non-profit organisation that advocates for healthy living and food justice for all, is appealing an Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) ruling that found its public-interest advert on the harmful effects of sugary drinks misleading and inaccurate. 

The ARB claimed that the messaging of the HEALA advertisement in question was positioned as fact instead of opinion, further citing that it was specifically worded to shock consumers into believing that any consumption of sugary drinks would lead to disease. 

We at HEALA believe that, if anything, our advertisement simply urges South Africans to be mindful of what they eat – especially foods high in sugar, salt, saturated fats and sweeteners, which can increase the risk of diabetes, heart disease, stroke and other non-communicable diseases.


“This case is important because it will determine whether organisations such as HEALA can continue to run evidence-based public health campaigns without being unfairly restricted by advertising rules. It affects how civil society can raise awareness about diet-related diseases, such as obesity and diabetes, and advocate for policies like a stronger Health Promotion Levy. The appeal also raises key questions about freedom of expression, association, and the right to food and health, while setting an important precedent for non-commercial, advocacy-focused campaigns in South Africa. A ruling in HEALA’s favour would protect the space for public-interest advocacy and ensure that scientific evidence can be used to inform and protect communities,” notes HEALA CEO, Nzama Mbalati. 

HEALA, and its partners, believe the public should be made aware of how industry players often try to block life-saving policies through tactics such as the one outlined above. We also believe that people have the right to understand the grounds of this case, as our mission is to inform and educate South African consumers. Below, we share more details on the case and the next steps to help our partners and the public stay informed.

What was the cause of the case?

In October 2024, HEALA ran a campaign calling for a stronger Health Promotion Levy (the tax on sugary drinks). One of the advertisements, broadcast in Afrikaans, stated:

“Fizzy drinks and fruit juice make our children sick. With every sip, sugar is dumped into their bodies, leading to obesity, heart disease and diabetes as they age. We must protect our children from all drinks with sugar in them. Insist on a stricter health promotion levy now. Sign the petition on heala.org.”

A consumer lodged a complaint claiming that his daughter was distressed after hearing the HEALA advertisement. He argued that the advert wrongly implied that drinking sugary drinks will definitely cause serious illnesses such as heart disease and diabetes, and that the advertisement therefore amounted to misleading health claims. 

Who is the ARB?

According to the ARB’s website it is “South Africa’s official self-regulation body that adjudicates complaints about advertising content.”  

The ARB is directly funded by several industry bodies, including companies that produce sodas and sugary drinks – which is the very controversial product in the public health advertisement.

What did the ARB originally say?

The Directorate of the Advertising Regulatory Board originally upheld the consumer’s complaint against HEALA’s advert. It found that the statement suggesting sugary drinks and fruit juice “make our children sick” was misleading because it implied that any consumption of such drinks would directly cause diseases like obesity, heart disease, and diabetes. The Directorate concluded that the advert presented these health risks as inevitable outcomes rather than potential long-term effects, and therefore breached the Code of Advertising Practice. This ruling meant the advert could no longer be carried by ARB member platforms, prompting HEALA’s appeal.

What did the Appeal Committee conclude?

The Advertising Appeals Committee (AAC) dismissed HEALA’s appeal on 23 June 2025 and upheld the Directorate’s ruling against the advert. The AAC agreed the advert was misleading because it gave the impression that any sugary drink would automatically make children sick and cause diseases such as obesity, heart disease, and diabetes. The Committee also rejected HEALA’s argument that the advert was public-interest advocacy and should be exempt from the Code, and that it should instead be treated as a set of factual health claims. HEALA argues this misrepresents both the purpose and wording of the advert, which was clearly intended as public health advocacy to protect children and build support for strengthening the Health Promotion Levy. By focusing on one consumer’s reaction rather than the broader advocacy message, the AAC’s ruling has limited HEALA’s ability to share its evidence-based campaign with the public.

What are the key issues to be decided before the final appeal committee?

  • Accuracy and evidence supporting the advert. The appeal body is to consider that HEALA’s advert is grounded in scientific evidence and expert reports, which clearly support the claims made about the harms of sugary drinks. HEALA provided two independent expert reports providing that the claim was accurate and highlighting the significant health risk of soda and fruit juice consumption on health.
  • Proper interpretation of the advert. The appeal body is to assess whether the ARB misread the advert as claiming that any sugar consumption will inevitably cause disease, when in fact it communicates that sugary drinks can contribute to long-term health risks.
  • Public-interest advocacy versus commercial advertising. The appeal body should recognise that the advert is part of HEALA’s public health advocacy, aiming to protect children and encourage public support for a heftier Health Promotion Levy. 
  • Jurisdiction of the ARB. The appeal body should consider whether health-related claims fall within the regulatory authority of the Department of Health rather than the ARB, and whether the ARB exceeded its mandate.
  • Non-commercial nature and consumer impact. The appeal body should weigh whether the advert misleads or harms consumers, noting that it simply encourages public engagement through petitioning and access to information.
  • Constitutional rights and advocacy standards. The appeal body should consider whether the AAC’s ruling imposes unreasonable restrictions on public health advocacy and infringes constitutional rights, including freedom of expression, association, and the right to adequate nutrition and health.

Why is this case important?

  • Protecting public health messaging. The outcome will affect how organisations such as HEALA can communicate evidence-based health risks, especially around sugar and diet-related diseases.
  • Safeguarding advocacy space. A ruling in HEALA’s favour would reinforce the ability of civil society to campaign on public-interest matters without being unfairly constrained by advertising regulations beyond that of commercial advertising.
  • Encouraging evidence-based action. The case underscores the importance of using scientific evidence in public campaigns to inform the public and influence policy, such as strengthening the Health Promotion Levy.
  • Defending constitutional rights. The appeal raises critical questions about freedom of expression, freedom of association, and the right to food and health, particularly in public health advocacy contexts.
  • Setting a precedent for non-commercial campaigns. The decision could clarify how non-commercial, advocacy-focused adverts are treated under the Advertising Code, shaping the landscape for future public health campaigns.

What are possible outcomes?

The appeal could have a few different outcomes. The Final Appeal Committee might rule in HEALA’s favour, confirming that the advert was lawful public-interest advocacy and allowing the campaign to continue. It could also dismiss the appeal, upholding the AAC’s finding that the advert was misleading, which would limit HEALA’s ability to run similar campaigns through ARB member channels. The Committee could also issue a partial ruling, clarifying how health claims or non-commercial advocacy should be treated under the advertising code. Whatever the outcome, both HEALA and the consumer would have the option to take the matter to the High Court for further review, keeping the door open for additional legal scrutiny. 

HEALA, looks forward to engaging with other stakeholders including the National Department of Health, National Treasury, and the sugar industry. It is vital that we properly educate and engage all stakeholders on this and other serious issues that could have a dire effect on the health of our nation. The industry needs to start putting the lives of South Africans ahead of profits.   

Ends

About HEALA
HEALA is a coalition of civil society organisations advocating for equitable access to affordable, nutritious food in South Africa by building a more just food system.

For media enquiries and interviews, please contact:

Mr. Neo Merafi: 071 359 9738 or Neo@maverickbrand.co.za 

Budget 2025: Godongwana has shown complete contempt for ordinary people living in South Africa. 

Posted on by Zukiswa Zimela

Press Statement

12 March 2025

For Immediate Release

The Healthy Living Alliance (HEALA) is deeply disappointed with Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana’s decision to capitulate to industry’s demands. 

The decision to hike the value-added tax (VAT) instead of increasing the Health Promotion Levy (HPL) flies in the face of scientific evidence, which shows that the increase of the HPL is vital lifesaving intervention and an easy way to boost the fiscus. Godongwana has shown complete contempt for ordinary people living in South Africa. 

The proposed increase in VAT is a regressive measure. Indeed, leading voices on tax justice have indicated how its increase will bring thousands, if not close to millions, in our country closer to poverty and economic disaster. 

We have lost an opportunity to save the lives of thousands of South Africans.  We have lost the opportunity to protect the most vulnerable amongst us, the poor. Since its inception in 2018, the levy has contributed R10bn to the fiscus and has the potential to do more. This is money which could be spent on various health promotion interventions.

Treasury itself identified the levy as a tool reduce obesity and non-communicable diseases, an out-of-control epidemic in South Africa costing the state billions of Rands in health care and affecting low-income members of our society the most. 

This missed opportunity will cost millions of South Africans their lives, their welfare and their finances. It is the responsibility of the government to protect the lives and overall wellbeing of the people it serves, not coddling an industry which has been taking advantage of the government’s good will. 

The decision to implement a further moratorium after the Finance Minister’s decision in 2023 to place a two-year moratorium on an increase of the HPL points to the government’s leniency to the sugar industry and its continued decision to pander to minority interests. It is very clear that the sugar industry is being treated with kid gloves. This is despite evidence of mismanagement and graft which has caused more damage to the industry than the HPL ever could.  We demand Treasury to reevaluate its decision and follow the science. 

 “It is deeply disappointing that the minister missed an opportunity to increase  HPL to 20% to boost the fiscus and instead chose the option to rather increase VAT, which will hit hard in the pockets of the poorest of the poor, who are the most affected by non-communicable diseases (NCDs) and will put a strain on the health system. We all are experiencing non-communicable diseases in one way or the other. Either oneself, relative, family member, friend, colleague are who is living or have lost their lives due to diabetes, heart diseases or cancer. It has become clear to the Minister of Finance that the lives and livelihoods of South Africans are less important than the profits of the sugar industry. It is obvious that the sugar industry, like it’s counterparts in the alcohol and tobacco industry, will continue to disregard the effects their products  have on South Africans”, says Nzama Mbalati, HEALA CEO. 

South Africans are dying and will continue to do so unless urgent intervention takes place. HEALA will continue to fight for the realisation of Food Justice For ALL!

About HEALA: 

For media interviews contact

Zukiswa Zimela Communications Manager HEALA 

0745210652 | zukiswa[@]heala.org

Keep the focus on the health of South Africans.

Posted on by Bilal Mpazayabo

By Bilal Mpazayabo | 22 October 2024

Media Statement 

22 October 2024

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Keep the focus on the health of South Africans.

HEALA acknowledges the recent comments from SA Canegrowers, which attempt to question the nature of our organisation as not being “home-grown.” This diversionary tactic is timed to shift attention away from the proven, life-saving effects of the South African Health Promotion Levy (HPL) and the irrefutable connection between excessive sugar consumption and diseases such as diabetes. With the mid-term budget speech approaching, it is vital to stay focused on what matters most: the health of South Africans.

HEALA is fully transparent regarding its staff, organisational journey, and funding sources—all publicly available. Moreover, we collaborate extensively with South African universities and local NGOs in our health promotion efforts, which cover multiple aspects of the food system. These partners, like HEALA, are transparent about their funding, and it is essential to note that none of our funders profit from our food justice advocacy. It is important to underline that philanthropy support has always played a critical role in responding to socio-economic needs in this country and that HEALA’s work is not an exception. In the spirit of transparency, we ask SA Canegrowers to disclose the origin of their funding and confirm whether it is free from any profit-driven motives.

The attempt to distract from the substance of this debate is telling. The policy rationale for the Health Promotion Levy is backed by a wide range of experts, including the World Health Organization, the South African Department of Health, the Treasury, economists, and public health specialists locally and internationally. Sugar taxation has been shown to reduce the amount of sugar added to beverages, discourage the consumption of sugary drinks, and generate government revenue—all while promoting public health. This model has been successfully used for tobacco and alcohol taxes, and it is no different for sugar.

In a country where more than 4.2 million people live with diabetes—now the second-leading cause of death after tuberculosis—this is a critical health intervention. The data is clear: households facing food insecurity are also often dealing with weight-related diseases like diabetes, hypertension, and high cholesterol. These diseases not only threaten lives but also impose crippling financial burdens on families already struggling to make ends meet.

An honest, home-grown debate on the HPL should focus on these realities. It should prioritise South Africans’ long-term health and financial well-being, particularly those most affected by non-communicable diseases. We urge SA Canegrowers and other stakeholders to engage in this debate with the same transparency and commitment to public health that HEALA brings to the table.

“ENDS”

About HEALA: HEALA is a coalition of civil society organisations advocating for equitable access to affordable, nutritious food in South Africa by building a more just food system.

For media interviews contact:

Bilal Mpazayabo, HEALA Social Media Coordinator

Bilal@heala.org | 0612374651

This heritage month HEALA is shining the spotlight on food sovereignty

Posted on by Zukiswa Zimela

Food is a fundamental part of our cultural identities. By allowing big food to homogenise our plates we run the risk of finding ourselves losing  the rich tapestry of our collective identities. This heritage month, HEALA is highlighting the importance of reclaiming our food sovereignty.

This however, this is near impossible given the proliferation of cheap, addictive ultra-processed food. HEALA is calling on government to use funds from unhealthy food taxes to subsidise healthier alternatives.  Since its inception in 2018 the Health Promotion Levy has raised billions  for the fiscus. The money can be used to implement health promotion measures such as subsidising healthy food and making it accessible to ordinary South Africans. It is widely excepted that our diets have changed significantly in the last few years.

These changes have led to a an alarming trend of increased deaths due to non-communicable diseases. More than six out of 10 women in South Africa are overweight or obese, a major risk factor for non-communicable diseases. Overall, the World Health Organisation estimates that almost one in three South Africans were obese in 2016. About 13% of children in South Africa are also overweight – more than twice the global average.

According to researchers “economic development has displaced traditional dietary patterns and driven a shift in food preferences, resulting in the nutrition transition”. This change in the food environment is synonymous with a proliferation of packaged foods high in sugar, salt and saturated fat, otherwise known as ultra-processed foods and undermines dietary patterns based on minimally and unprocessed food and processed culinary ingredients. 

READ MORE: An increase in the Health Promotion Levy will not only reduce the consumption of unhealthy sugary drinks, but it can also be used to improve the health of the country’s children.

Since the dawn of democracy, experts note that our diets have shifted towards an increase in sugar-sweetened beverages, processed and packaged foods, sweet and savoury snacks, and increased meat consumption. We have moved away from consuming vegetables. These shifts in food consumption are concerning as it leads to more fat, sugar and salt intake and negative impacts on public health.

“We know that half of South Africans are dying from non-communicable disease at the moment, and that Statistics South Africa has already said this is our next looming health crisis,” says Dr Petronell Kruger, Programmes’ Manager at Healthy Living Alliance. This begs the question, why can we take diseases like Covid-19 seriously to the extent of lockdowns, but we don’t see serious government intervention to protect our lives and our cultural heritage.”

“Ends”

The evidence is clear: Sugary beverages are harmful; SA’s Health Promotion Levy is helpful

Posted on by Zukiswa Zimela

04 March 2021

“The science is clear on the harmful effects of sugar added to beverages and the strong, beneficial, effects of your current Health Promotion Levy (HPL).”

Over 35 top experts on obesity, diet-related diseases and public health from some of the world’s leading universities have written to Treasury officials to support increasing the current HPL to 20%. They are also very impressed with the results of evaluations done on the current HPL.

The dangers of sugary beverages

Drinking liquid sugar in beverages and the extra calories a person takes in this way have been linked to noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) like diabetes, hypertension, overweight and obesity. These are leading causes of death and disability in later life in South Africa.

  • Sugary drinks often have no nutritional value.
  • They are particularly harmful to the body in liquid form because the liver absorbs them more quickly than it can process and release. The excess is then stored as fat or glycogen deposits in the liver. This can lead to fatty liver disease and a higher risk for diabetes and other NCDs.
  • A person should not consume more than 10% of total calories from added sugar (World Health Organization and the World Cancer Research Fund guidelines).
  • But just one 600ml bottle of cooldrink contains 12% of total calories from added sugars for an adult.
  • It would require 16 minutes of running and over 1.5 km of walking to exercise it off.

Counting the costs

The COVID-19 pandemic has shown how obesity, diabetes and hypertension add a much higher risk of going to hospital or dying from COVID-19.

Praise for the HPL results

South Africa’s HPL was the first major sugar-sweetened beverage tax based on grams of sugar. Researchers at the University of the Witwatersrand and the University of the Western Cape found that:

  • Prices of taxable beverages increased over the first year of the tax, while non-taxable beverage prices did not change meaningfully.
  • After the tax was introduced, purchases of taxable beverages by urban households fell by 29%, and sugar content from these purchases fell by 51%. Importantly, poorer households cut the volumes of their sugar sweetened beverage (SSB) by nearly a third, and dropped grams of sugar from SSBs by over half (57%).
  • In Langa in the Western Cape, young adults aged 18-39 years reported they drank 37% less SSBs and reduced sugar intake by nearly a third (31%).
  • In Soweto, Johannesburg, a study found that heavy consumers of SBBs dropped their intake by seven times a week, and medium consumers by two times a week, between the start of the study and after 12 months. These reductions stayed for two years after the HPL was introduced.
  • And contrary to industry’s gloomy predictions, public data on employment in the sugar and beverage industries showed no statistically significant change in employment and followed pre-implementation trends.

Why increasing the HPL remains a great idea

“The HPL will have a long-term effect on excessive weight gain and a direct impact on reducing the risk of diabetes, hypertension and many other NCDs.”

  • To further promote health, the global experts urged for the HPL to be doubled to the 20% levy that Treasury itself proposed in June 2016. This will greatly affect sugar consumption and dropping the cut-off level to 1 or 2 grams/100ml will have an even greater impact.
  • The HPL has generated revenue of R5.4 billion over the first two years of the tax being in place (approximately 0.2% of total government revenue over the same period).
  • The revenue could be used to cover health-related COVID costs, or go towards strengthening health services that focus on preventing disease.

HEALA believes that Government now has plenty of evidence to prove that the HPL is working. It could do even more.

The experience with the HPL shows that public health policies that increase the price of harmful products do reduce consumption.

Even more importantly, South Africans need to know what is in their food and drink so that they can make informed choices about healthy living and take control of their health.

202102 Global Experts Call for 20HPL

Media Release: Doubling the sugary beverage levy could raise billions for Covid-19 fight

Posted on by Zukiswa Zimela

If South Africa doubled its sugary beverage levy, it could raise billions to help fund the fight against Covid-19.

In 2018, South Africa introduced a health promotion levy of about 11% on sugary beverages to help curb the country’s sugar consumption, which is fuelling a rise in non-communicable diseases, such as diabetes, high blood pressure and obesity. 

Currently, beverages are taxed about 2.21 cents per gram of sugar for anything over a 4-gram threshold. The current levy adds about 46 cents to the price of an average can of original taste Coca-Cola, for instance. The levy does not apply to natural fruit juices or sweetened dairy products.  

Within its first two years, the health promotion levy has generated R5.4 billion for government. This would have been enough to finance South Africa’s down payment for Covid-19 vaccines from the Covax facility almost 20 times over despite the health promotion levy’s relatively small contribution to government’s overall budget. 

If the National Treasury doubled the health promotion levy now, it could net the government around R2 billion to help fund the fight against Covid-19 in the short term, head of the Healthy Living Alliance (HEALA) Lawrence Mbalati says. This estimate is based on current consumption levels and the revenue raised by the levy already.

If Treasury doubled the levy and raised R2 billion, that would be enough to pay for several thousand new nurses and doctors, as well as tens of thousands of community healthcare workers based on average salary ranges. 

“This is a watershed moment for the country,” Mbalati explains. “Government revenues are under immense pressure and funding the fight against Covid-19, including vaccines, remains critical.”

“Policymakers, and in particular the National Treasury, have an opportunity now to decide to increase the health promotion levy to 20% to raise additional revenue in the short-term,” he says. “In the long-term, we know that a health promotion levy of 20% will reduce the amount of sugar people eat, decreasing their chance of developing conditions such as diabetes, obesity and high blood pressure that also put people at a higher risk of dying from Covid-19.”

Globally, being obese has been shown to increase a person’s risk of dying from Covid-19 by almost 50% and more than doubles the risk of being hospitalised, according to a recent analysis published in the journal Obesity Reviews.  

South Africa’s health promotion levy has already led some beverage makers to reduce the amount of sugar in their drinks. One study by PRICELESS SA found that the levy also reduced sugary beverage consumption by 60% among people in Soweto who consumed a lot of sugar.

Meanwhile, there is no evidence to date that the levy has led to job losses in the sugar or beverage industry, contrary to industry claims. 

A health promotion levy of 20% in the long-term could reduce sugar consumption, saving lives both from non-communicable diseases but also Covid-19 as many scientists expect the virus to remain with us in the foreseeable future. 

HEALA is therefore calling on the National Treasury to act now.

“Raising the health promotion levy to 20% is absolutely critical to not only funding the Covid-19 fight but also to saving lives now and in the future.”

For interviews, contact:
Lawrence Mbalati, head of the Healthy Living Alliance (HEALA)
082 734 5414
lawrence@heala.org 

Click here to download and read the pdf

Read more:
What you need to know about South Africa’s health promotion levy

Watch:
Healthy Living Alliance Media Briefing: Increase the HPL to 20%

Fact Sheet: Evidence to support increasing South Africa’s Health Promotion Levy (HPL) to 20% in 2021

Posted on by Zukiswa Zimela

South Africa implemented its Health Promotion Levy, or HPL, in April of 2018. The HPL is a sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax of approximately 11%, based on sugar content. Initial research on the price impact of the HPL has shown prices increased commensurate with the tax for taxed beverages but did not change for non-taxable beverages and reduced consumption.

Click here to download and read the pdf

Embargoed For Release

Posted on by Zukiswa Zimela

Big Food Used Global Pandemic to Aggressively Promote Unhealthy, Ultra-Processed Food & Sugary Drinks

A new report finds that the food and beverage industry giants directly and indirectly blocked. Healthy food policies while putting vulnerable consumers at even greater risk.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A new report released by the Global Health Advocacy Incubator [GHAI] details how food and beverage corporations – such as Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Nestlé, and PepsiCo – seized the coronavirus pandemic as a unique opportunity to promote their ultra-processed foods to especially vulnerable populations around the world.

Facing Two Pandemics: How Big Food Undermined Public Health in the Era of COVID-19


Reveals how the lack of healthy food regulations worldwide enabled “Big Food” to use the global COVID-19 crisis, publicly portraying themselves as do-gooders while directly and indirectly influencing policy and putting disadvantaged people at even greater risk. These same corporations – whose ultra-processed food and sugary drinks were already contributing to rising rates of obesity, malnutrition, and diet-related diseases – used the pandemic to position themselves and their unhealthy products as essential and safe, putting those compromised populations at even higher risk of coronavirus complications and mortality. GHAI collected more than 280 examples from 18 countries between March and July 2020.

“Based on the examples we gathered, it quickly became clear that Big Food was working hard to position themselves as a crucial part of the pandemic solution,” said Holly Wong, GHAI Vice President, “while furthering their own gains by hindering the advancement of public health policies.”

The GHAI report outlines key ways “Big Food” exploited the coronavirus pandemic to their advantage:

  • They polished their public images with pandemic “solidarity actions,” while aggressively promoting their junk food and sugary drink brands. They donated ultra-processed products to children in school programs and low-income populations when these people needed nutritious foods. They also donated and promoted baby formula, breaching the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes. In South Africa, Coca-Cola collaborated with a nonprofit to donate “cooldrinks” – soft drinks – to local healthcare centers, including an obesity care center.
  • They touted unhealthy ultra-processed food and drinks as essential, safe products, equating food safety with healthy food. In Brazil, the industry group ILSI (International Life Science Institute) highlights that processed foods are allies in the fight against COVID-19 touting their high safety levels that reduce the risk of chemical and physical contamination.
  • They funded online educational platforms aimed at helping children learn during quarantine, dangerously blending marketing with educational information, and positioning these corporations as reliable sources of health-related information. An online learning platform used by schoolchildren in the US featured junk food advertising.
  • They spun a health and wellbeing narrative publicly while leveraging the pandemic as a way to delay healthy food policy. In México, they attempted to use COVID-19 as an excuse to postpone implementing a new front-of-package warning label law.
  • They promoted junk food as a tonic for tough times, linking unhealthy food with appealing sentiments such as comfort, nostalgia, and family togetherness. In Brazil, Burger King promoted its fast-food delivery service under the guise of helping people to stay safe at home.
  • They linked their ultra-processed food and drinks with charitable causes, helping consumers feel good about unhealthy purchases. In the US, Coca-Cola partnered with Uber Eats to donate one meal to Feeding America for every order placed.

These corporate interventions enabled Big Food to improve their image, strengthen their brands, ally with decisionmakers to gain political influence, and position their businesses as public-health partners during an emergency – even as they used these opportunities to advance their own unhealthy products.

Ultimately, the GHAI report underscores the urgent need for evidence-based healthy food policies and regulations, as well as stronger conflict-of-interest protocols, worldwide.

“This is a wake-up call for governments to implement evidence-based public policies designed to create healthier food environments and to protect the right to adequate food,” said Lawrence Mbalati, Programmes Manager of South Africa’s Healthy Living Alliance.

“Such policies will help consumers make healthier nutritional choices during vulnerable times like these. The bottom line is, governments must prioritize public health above private interests and profits.”

E N D S

Click here for the report: https://bit.ly/two-pandemics

For media interviews, please contact Lawrence Mbalati, HEALA Programmes Manager,
082 734 5414; lawrence@heala.org. Please note, in addition to English, Lawrence speaks Xitsonga (first language), Tshivenda, Sepedi, Sesotho/Setswana and can also speak isiZulu and isiXhosa.

About the Healthy Living Alliance (HEALA)

HEALA is a  leading alliance of civil society and academic organisations fighting for every person’s right to healthy food in South Africa. Launched in 2016 by the civil society organisations and academic institutions, HEALA successfully campaigned for the Sugary Drinks Tax implemented by South African Government in April 2018.

HEALA’s current campaigns include advocating for clear warning labels on ultra-processed foods, healthy food environment, marketing restrictions of junk food and sugary drinks to under-age children in South Africa.