Genetic diseases: How scientists are working to make DNA repair (almost) a piece of cake 
The brightest object in the universe is a black hole that eats a star a day 
The brain is the most complicated object in the universe. This is the story of scientists’ quest to decode it – and read people’s minds 
Alpha, beta, theta: what are brain states and brain waves? And can we control them? 
Why now is the time to address humanity’s impact on the moon 
What is minoxidil, the anti-balding hair growth treatment? Here’s what the science says 
Six space missions to look forward to in 2024 
How do airplanes fly? An aerospace engineer explains the physics of flight 
If life exists on Jupiter’s moon Europa, scientists might soon be able to detect it 
Why is the universe ripping itself apart? A new study of exploding stars shows dark energy may be more complicated than we thought 
Synthetic human embryos let researchers study early development while sidestepping ethical and logistical hurdles 
Dark energy is one of the biggest puzzles in science and we're now a step closer to understanding it 
Tatahouine: 'Star Wars meteorite' sheds light on the early Solar System 
The rising flood of space junk is a risk to us on Earth – and governments are on the hook 
One of the biggest contributors to the ballooning waistlines in the U.S. is the increasing consumption of junk food and sugary drinks. Health experts have long been waging a tough campaign against the unhealthy industry. Unfortunately, the results pin the junk food industry as the winning side. Many have speculated that taxing soda, chips, and other unhealthy snacks could be a good way to combat obesity, and researchers have recently concluded that this was legally viable.
The conclusion was made by New York University researchers and it is expected to cause quite a bit of controversy. According to the press release discussing the matter, the researchers found that imposing the same taxes on junk food as is already being done on tobacco is technically viable under the current legal system. The study’s lead author, Jennifer L. Pomeranz confirms as much in a statement.
“Economic and social environments can influence food choice in beneficial and harmful directions. Our finding that a federal manufacturer excise junk food tax — defined through product category or combined category-nutrient approaches — appears to be legally and administratively feasible and has strong implications for nutrition policy,” Pomeranz said.
Their findings were published in the American Journal of Public Health, where the researchers conclude that an excise tax enforced on a federal level and imposed on manufacturers would be a good option. This conclusion was echoed and already proposed by many health and law experts, citing several countries and even states that already have some form of junk food tax.
Now, it’s worth pointing out that it really doesn’t matter which party the tax is imposed. Consumers are still going to end up paying more if the manufacturers are slapped with higher taxes since they’ll pass on the extra expense to buyers by increasing the prices.
It’s been proven that past methods have not been effective in curbing obesity. A radical solution might be the only solution.
