Impact of the Philadelphia Beverage Tax on Perceived Beverage Healthfulness, Tax Awareness, and Tax Opinions.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the Philadelphia Beverage Tax on perceived beverage healthfulness, and awareness and opinions of the tax. DESIGN: Natural experiment SETTING: Small independent stores in Philadelphia (n = 61) and Baltimore (untaxed control site; n = 65) PARTICIPANTS: Shoppers in Philadelphia (n = 2,731) and Baltimore (n = 4,600) pre- and post-tax implementation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceptions of 4 beverages (unhealthy vs healthy/neutral), tax awareness, and tax opinions (oppose vs favor/neutral). ANALYSIS: Mixed-effects linear probability models estimated changes in perceived beverage healthfulness in Philadelphia, relative to Baltimore, following a difference-in-differences approach. Mixed-effects linear probability models estimated pre-post changes in tax awareness and opinions in Philadelphia-only. RESULTS: The probability of perceiving taxed beverages as unhealthy increased 2-years post-tax relative to Baltimore (regular soda: 5.7% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.9-10.6], P = 0.02; diet soda: 7.7% [95% CI, 1.5-13.8], P < 0.001; sports drinks: 6.4% [95% CI, 0.4-12.4], P = 0.04), with similar changes at 1-year post-tax, whereas perceived healthfulness of untaxed 100% fruit juice did not change. Tax awareness was high at baseline (72%) and increased post-implementation; however, the probability of opposing the tax (22%) also increased over time. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Decreases in the perceived healthfulness of taxed beverages suggest the tax had a health-signaling effect. Consumer awareness and health education efforts could complement tax policies to enhance understanding of health risks.

Advertising and Stocking at Small Retailers: A Sweetened Beverage Excise Tax in Philadelphia.

INTRODUCTION: In 2017, Philadelphia enacted a $0.015 per ounce excise tax on SBs that covered both sugar-sweetened beverages and artificially-sweetened beverages, which reduced purchasing and consumption. This study assessed whether the tax also changed beverage advertising or stocking practices that could influence consumer behavior among stores in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Philadelphia-adjacent counties not subject to the tax. METHODS: Using a longitudinal difference-in-differences approach, beverage advertising and availability changes were evaluated from 4-month pretax to 6-, 12-, and 24-month post-implementation in small independent stores in Philadelphia (n=34) and Philadelphia-adjacent counties (n=38) versus Baltimore (n=43), a demographically similar city without a tax. Mixed effects models tested whether beverage advertising/availability increased in Philadelphia and surrounding counties after implementation versus Baltimore, included store-level random intercepts, and were stratified by beverage tax status, type, size, and store ZIP code income. Data were collected from 2016 to 2018, and analyses were performed in 2022-2023. RESULTS: SB advertising increased post-tax in Philadelphia (6 months= +1.04 advertisements/store [95% CI=0.27, 1.80]; 12 months= +1.54 [95% CI=0.57, 2.52]; 24 months= +0.91 [95% CI=0.09, 1.72]) relative to Baltimore. This was driven by increased advertising of sweetened beverages in low-income ZIP codes. Marketing of SBs increased significantly in Philadelphia-adjacent counties relative to Baltimore. Although SB availability in Philadelphia did not change, it increased in surrounding county stores (6 months= +0.20 [95% CI=0.15, 0.25]; 12 months= +0.08 [95% CI=0.03, 0.12]) relative to Baltimore. CONCLUSIONS: Marketing of SBs, especially in low-income neighborhoods and in surrounding counties, increased following Philadelphia's beverage tax among small, independent retailers. These increases in advertising might have dampened the tax's effect on purchasing behaviors, although estimated effects on sales remained large.

Sustained Impact of the Philadelphia Beverage Tax on Beverage Prices and Sales Over 2 Years.

INTRODUCTION: It is unclear whether changes in beverage price and sales after beverage tax implementation can be sustained long term. This study aims to quantify the changes in beverage prices and sales in large retailers 2 years after the implementation of the 1.5 cents per ounce Philadelphia beverage tax. METHODS: Data on price and volume sales of beverages and potential food substitutes were collected from 109 supermarkets, 45 mass merchandizers, and 350 pharmacies in Philadelphia, Baltimore (control), and Pennsylvania ZIP codes bordering Philadelphia (to investigate potential cross-border shopping for tax avoidance). Difference-in-differences analyses compared beverage prices and volume sales in the year before tax implementation (2016) to 2 years after (2018). Data were analyzed in 2020-2021. RESULTS: Difference-in-differences analyses found that after tax implementation, taxed beverage prices in Philadelphia increased by 1.02 cents per ounce (95% CI=0.94, 1.11; 68% pass through), and taxed beverage volume sales in stores decreased by 50% (95% CI=36%, 61%). After accounting for cross-border shopping, taxed beverage volume sales decreased in Philadelphia by 35% in 2018. Volume sales of nontaxed beverages did not change after tax implementation (difference-in-differences=4%, 95% CI= -3%, 12%). Volume sales of nontaxed beverage concentrates increased on average by 34% (95% CI=19%, 51%), but there was no evidence of substitution to high-calorie foods. CONCLUSIONS: There was a large reduction in taxed beverage volume sales 2 years after Philadelphia tax implementation, even after accounting for cross-border shopping. Increases in nontaxed beverage concentrate sales likely partially offset this decline, but there was no evidence of post-tax food substitution.

Analysis of Public Testimony About Philadelphia's Sweetened Beverage Tax.

INTRODUCTION: Although interest in beverage taxes has increased in recent years, industry opposition and other challenges have limited their spread in the U.S. Because beverage tax proposals are often unsuccessful, there is limited empirical evidence to inform advocacy efforts. Philadelphia's 1.5 cent-per-ounce tax on sweetened beverages provides an opportunity to understand how public testimony for and against the tax was framed in a city that ultimately passed the policy. METHODS: A content analysis of all public testimony about the beverage tax presented to the Philadelphia City Council in 2016 was conducted. Testimonies were coded for policy stance (protax or antitax), speaker type, and specific protax or antitax arguments. Quantitative data were analyzed in 2018-2019 using chi-square tests. RESULTS: A total of 177 unique testimonies were identified, which included 40 protax arguments (grouped into 11 themes) and 31 antitax arguments (grouped into 10 themes). Most testimonies were delivered orally, and most speakers argued in favor of the tax (58%). Among tax supporters, funding early childhood education was the most common argument (71%), whereas tax opponents most frequently argued that sugar-sweetened beverages were the wrong target for the tax (50%). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of public testimony revealed that protax advocacy efforts highlighted the revenue benefits for early childhood education and community infrastructure rather than the tax's potential to reduce sweetened beverage consumption and improve health. By contrast, antitax arguments centered on the unfairness of targeting a single industry, potential negative economic impacts, and the perceived lack of evidence that the tax would influence consumer behavior.

Purchases of Nontaxed Foods, Beverages, and Alcohol in a Longitudinal Cohort After Implementation of the Philadelphia Beverage Tax.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that sweetened beverage taxes reduce taxed beverage purchases, but few studies have used individual-level data to assess whether these taxes affect purchases of nontaxed foods, beverages, and alcohol. Additionally, research has not examined whether sweetened beverage taxes influence restaurant purchases. OBJECTIVES: We assessed changes in individuals' purchases of taxed beverage types; low-calorie/low-added-sugar nontaxed beverages; high-calorie/high-added-sugar nontaxed beverages, foods, and alcohol; and beverages from restaurants following implementation of the 1.5 cent-per-ounce Philadelphia sweetened beverage tax. METHODS: A longitudinal cohort of adult sugar-sweetened beverage consumers in Philadelphia (n = 306; 67% female; mean age: 43.9 years) and Baltimore (n = 297; comparison city without a beverage tax; 58% female; mean age: 41.7 years) submitted all food and beverage receipts during 2-week periods at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months posttax. Difference-in-differences analyses compared changes in purchases from pre- to posttax in Philadelphia to changes in Baltimore. RESULTS: Purchases of taxed juice drinks [ratio of incidence rate ratios (RIRR) = 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.91], but not other taxed beverage types, decreased in Philadelphia compared to Baltimore following the tax. Analyses did not find changes in purchases of low-calorie/low-added-sugar nontaxed beverages, such as water or milk. Additionally, analyses did not find increases in purchases of most high-calorie/high-added-sugar nontaxed products, including alcohol, juice, candy, sweet snacks, salty snacks, and desserts. Purchases of beverage concentrates increased in Philadelphia (RIRR = 2.22; 95% CI, 1.39-3.54). CONCLUSIONS: In this difference-in-differences analysis, the Philadelphia beverage tax was associated with reduced purchases of taxed juice drinks. Purchases of beverage concentrates increased after the tax, but no increases were observed for other high-calorie/high-added-sugar nontaxed foods, beverages, or alcohol.

A qualitative study on retailer experiences with Philadelphia's sweetened beverage tax.

The Philadelphia Beverage Tax was implemented on January 1, 2017 for some sugar- and artificially-sweetened beverages. Few qualitative studies have assessed retailers' reactions to beverage taxes. We aimed to understand food retailers' knowledge and attitudes about the Philadelphia beverage tax and how they responded to it with the goal of informing the framing and implementation of beverage taxes in other interested jurisdictions. Researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with retailers within Philadelphia before (n = 15) and after (n = 11) the Philadelphia Beverage Tax was implemented. Purposeful sampling was used to recruit participants with different store locations and customer base characteristics. A priori codes based on the interview guide were used to organize data, and analytic memos were developed and reviewed to identify themes that emerged within the data using a grounded theory approach. Five themes emerged: (a) concerns about the tax purpose, amount, and use of revenue; (b) concerns about the tax's impact on finances and business operations; (c) business strategies implemented to lessen financial burden of the tax; (d) perceptions of customer responses to the tax based on income; and (e) confusion around tax implementation. Results highlighted ways to improve implementation. Retailers in Philadelphia implemented various strategies to offset negative effects on taxed beverage sales. Cities implementing a beverage tax would benefit from investment in educational outreach and support to business owners prior to tax implementation and ensure transparency in how tax revenue will be spent.

Prior research has shown that while retailers worry about the impact a beverage tax would have on sales, many pass the tax onto consumers as a strategy to mitigate loss. This paper uncovers additional retailer concerns that can inform the framing and implementation of beverage taxes in other interested jurisdictions. Retailers especially desired transparency in governmental tax revenue spending. Increased investment in educational outreach to retailers about the tax may help address misconceptions and improve implementation.

Association of a Sweetened Beverage Tax With Purchases of Beverages and High-Sugar Foods at Independent Stores in Philadelphia.

Importance: The relationship between a sweetened beverage tax and changes in the prices and purchases of beverages and high-sugar food is understudied in the long term and in small independent food retail stores where sugar-sweetened beverages are among the most commonly purchased items. Objective: To examine whether a 1.5 cent-per-fluid-ounce excise tax on sugar- and artificially sweetened beverages Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was associated with sustained changes in beverage prices and purchases, as well as calories purchased from beverages and high-sugar foods, over 2 years at small independent stores. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a difference-in-differences approach to compare changes in beverage prices and purchases of beverages and high-sugar foods (candy, sweet snacks) at independent stores in Philadelphia and Baltimore, Maryland (a nontaxed control) before and 2 years after tax implementation, which occurred on January 1, 2017. Price comparisons were also made to independent stores in Philadelphia's neighboring counties. Main Outcomes and Measures: Changes in mean price (measured in cents per fluid ounce) of taxed and nontaxed beverages, mean fluid ounces purchased of taxed and nontaxed beverages, and mean total calories purchased from beverages and high-sugar foods. Results: Compared with Baltimore independent stores, taxed beverage prices in Philadelphia increased 2.06 cents per fluid ounce (95% CI, 1.75 to 2.38 cents per fluid ounce; P < .001), with 137% of the tax passed through to prices 2 years after tax implementation, while nontaxed beverage prices had no statistically significant change. A total of 116 independent stores and 4738 customer purchases (1950 [41.2%] women; 4351 [91.8%] age 18 years or older; 1006 [21.2%] White customers, 3185 [67.2%] Black customers) at independent stores were assessed for price and purchase comparisons. Purchases of taxed beverages declined by 6.1 fl oz (95% CI, -9.9 to -2.4 fl oz; P < .001), corresponding to a 42% decline in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore; there were no significant changes in purchases of nontaxed beverages. Although there was no significant moderation by neighborhood income or customer education level, exploratory stratified analyses revealed that declines in taxed beverage purchases were larger among customers shopping in low-income neighborhoods (-7.1 fl oz; 95% CI, -13.0 to -1.1 fl oz; P = .001) and individuals with lower education levels (-6.9 fl oz; 95% CI, -12.5 to -1.3 fl oz; P = .001). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that a tax on sweetened beverages was associated with increases in price and decreases in purchasing. Beverage excise taxes may be an effective policy to sustainably decrease purchases of sweetened drinks and calories from sugar in independent stores, with large reductions in lower-income areas and among customers with lower levels of education.

No Evidence of Food or Alcohol Substitution in Response to a Sweetened Beverage Tax.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence suggests real-world beverage taxes reduce sweetened beverage purchases, but it is unknown if consumers consequently increase food or alcohol purchases. This study examines whether Philadelphia's 1.5 cents/ounce beverage tax was associated with substitution to 3 kinds of hypothesized substitutes: snacks, nontaxed beverage concentrates, and alcohol. METHODS: Using commercial retail sales data and a difference-in-differences approach, analyses compared logged volume and dollar sales of snacks and beverage concentrates between 2016 (pretax) and 2017 (post-tax) at chain food retail stores in Philadelphia (n=180) and Baltimore (nontaxed control city; n=60), and logged volume and dollar sales of wine and spirits at liquor stores in Philadelphia (n=44) and nearby Pennsylvania counties (alternate control; n=66). Additional food analyses examined change in logged volume sales of hypothesized products compared to control products (other foods). Analyses were conducted in 2020. RESULTS: Across store types, analyses showed no statistically significant increases in logged volume or dollar sales of snacks or spirits in Philadelphia stores compared to control sites (decreased, ranging from -10% to 0%). Supermarket analyses showed substitution to nontaxed beverage concentrates (27% increase in volume, 36% increase relative to other food) but remained a relatively small percentage of overall beverage dollar sales (12% at baseline, 15% at post). CONCLUSIONS: At the population level, there is no evidence that Philadelphia's decline in taxed beverage purchases is offset by increases in snacks or spirits purchasing, but there is evidence of substitution to beverage concentrates in supermarkets. Future studies should explore individual-level purchasing changes.

The Association Of A Sweetened Beverage Tax With Changes In Beverage Prices And Purchases At Independent Stores.

In January 2017 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, implemented an excise tax of 1.5 cents per ounce on beverages sweetened with sugar or artificial sweeteners. Small independent stores are an important yet understudied setting. They are visited frequently in urban and low-income areas, and sugary beverages are among the most commonly purchased items in them. We compared changes in beverage prices and purchases before and twelve months after tax implementation at small independent stores in Philadelphia and an untaxed control city, Baltimore, Maryland. Our sample included 134 stores with price data and 4,584 customer purchases. Compared with Baltimore, Philadelphia experienced significantly greater increases in the price of taxed beverages (1.81 cents per ounce, or 120.4 percent of the tax) and significantly larger declines in the volume of taxed beverages sold (5.76 ounces, or 38.9 percent) after tax implementation. Beverage excise taxes may be an effective policy tool for decreasing the purchase of sweetened drinks in small independent stores, particularly among populations at higher risk for sugar-sweetened beverage consumption.

One-year changes in sugar-sweetened beverage consumers' purchases following implementation of a beverage tax: a longitudinal quasi-experiment.

BACKGROUND: Few longitudinal studies examine the response to beverage taxes, especially among regular sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumers. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine changes in objectively measured beverage purchases associated with the Philadelphia beverage tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages. METHODS: A longitudinal quasi-experiment was conducted with adult sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumers in Philadelphia (n = 306) and Baltimore (n = 297; a nontaxed comparison city). From 2016 to 2017 participants submitted all food and beverage receipts during a 2-wk period at: baseline (pretax) and 3, 6, and 12 mo posttax (91.0% retention; data analyzed in 2019). Linear mixed effects models were used to assess the difference-in-differences in total purchased ounces (fl oz) of taxed beverages in a 2-wk period in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore. Secondary analyses: 1) excluded weeks that contained major holidays at baseline and 12 mo (42% of measured weeks at baseline and 12 mo) because policy implementation timing necessitated data collection during holidays when SSB demand may be more inelastic, and 2) aggregated posttax time points to address serial correlation and low power. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant changes in purchased ounces of taxed beverages in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore in the primary analysis. After excluding holiday purchasing, the tax was associated with statistically significant reductions of taxed beverage purchases at 3 and 6 mo (-157.1 ounces, 95% CI: -310.1, -4.1 and -175.1 ounces, 95% CI: -328.0, -22.3, respectively) but not 12 mo. Analyses aggregating all 6 wk of posttax time points showed statistically significant reductions (-203.7 ounces, 95% CI: -399.6, -7.8). CONCLUSIONS: A sweetened beverage tax was not associated with reduced taxed beverage purchases among SSB consumers 12 mo posttax in the full sample. Both secondary analyses excluding holiday purchasing or aggregating posttax time periods found reductions in taxed beverage purchases ranging from -4.9 to -12.5 ounces per day. Larger longitudinal studies are needed to further understand tax effects.

Tobacco Retail Licensing and Density 3 Years After License Regulations in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (2012-2019).

Objectives. To evaluate changes in licensed tobacco retailers and retailer density 5 years before and 3 years after novel tobacco retailer licensing regulations were implemented in a large, urban area.Methods. We used administrative tobacco license data (n = 23 806 licenses, 2012-2019) to calculate (1) annual retailer density by district (n = 18), (2) density by district and school income status, and (3) retailers within 500 feet of schools (n = 673) before and after regulations.Results. Observed tobacco retailer density declined by 20.3% (from 1.97 to 1.57 per 1000 daytime residents) 3 years after regulation implementation. Regression results showed a decline in the trend of retailers per 1000 daytime population (b = -0.19; 95% confidence interval[CI] = -0.23, -0.14) that was modestly but significantly greater in low-income districts (interaction b = -0.18; 95% CI = -0.25, -0.11) and a 12% decline in the rates of retailers near schools (rate ratio = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.85, 0.92) following implementation of the regulations. We did not observe similar density changes in comparable cities.Conclusions. Tobacco retailer licensing strategies can be an effective policy approach to reduce the availability of tobacco and tobacco marketing, lessen socioeconomic disparities in tobacco retailer density, and decrease the number of tobacco outlets near schools.

Hydrate Philly: An Intervention to Increase Water Access and Appeal in Recreation Centers.

INTRODUCTION: Previous interventions to increase water access and consumption have focused on school settings, have shown mixed results on sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption, and have rarely addressed tap water safety. Our randomized controlled trial examined how improving access and appeal of water in recreation centers in low-income neighborhoods affected counts of SSBs carried by youth attending summer camp. METHODS: Recreation centers (N = 28) matched on their characteristics were randomly assigned to control or intervention groups. Intervention centers received a new water fountain with a bottle filler (hydration station), water testing services, reusable water bottles, and water promotion and education training and materials. Primary outcomes were 1-year changes in center-level average daily gallons of water from fountains and hydration stations (flowmeter readings). Secondary outcomes were counts of SSBs observed, use of bottled water and reusable water bottles, staff SSB consumption, and hydration station maintenance. RESULTS: Results showed increased water use (b = 8.6, 95% CI, 4.2-13.0) and reusable bottle counts (b = 10.2, 95% CI, 4.2-16.1) in intervention centers compared with control centers. No change occurred in youth carrying SSBs at camp, but center staff's past 30-day SSB consumption frequency decreased (b = -34.8, 95% CI, -67.7 to -1.9). Intervention sites had marginally lower odds of maintenance problems (OR = 0.09; 95% CI, 0.004-0.76, P = .06) than control sites. CONCLUSION: Although providing hydration stations along with water testing, reusable water bottles, education, and promotion increased water consumption among youth at recreation centers, it had no effect on the number of SSBs observed during camp. Future strategies to increase water consumption should also address reducing SSB intake.

Online Randomized Controlled Trials of Restaurant Sodium Warning Labels.

INTRODUCTION: Policymakers are interested in requiring chain restaurants to display sodium warning labels on menus to reduce sodium consumption. This study examined the influence of label design on consumers' hypothetical choices, meal perceptions, and knowledge. STUDY DESIGN: Four sequential, randomized, controlled online experiments were conducted. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Across all 4 experiments, 10,412 sociodemographically diverse participants were recruited online through Survey Sampling International and Amazon Mechanical Turk. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomized to view restaurant menus with either no sodium label (control) or 1 of 13 sodium warning labels that varied the text (e.g., "sodium warning" versus "high sodium"), icons (e.g., stop sign), and colors (red/black) used. Participants placed a hypothetical meal order and rated restaurant meal perceptions. Data were collected and analyzed in 2016-2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was sodium content of hypothetical restaurant choices. Secondary outcomes included restaurant meal perceptions and sodium knowledge. RESULTS: In Experiments 1-3, all warning labels reduced average sodium ordered across both restaurants (by 19-81 mg) versus controls, with some of the largest reductions from traffic light and stop sign labels, but results were not statistically significant. In a larger, preregistered replication (Experiment 4) testing traffic light and red stop sign labels versus control, traffic light and red stop sign labels significantly reduced average sodium ordered across both restaurants (-68 mg, p=0.002 and -46 mg, p=0.049, respectively). Warnings also significantly increased participants' knowledge of sodium content and perceived health risks associated with high-sodium meals compared with no label. CONCLUSIONS: Traffic light and red stop sign warning labels significantly reduced sodium ordered compared with a control. Warning labels also increased knowledge about high sodium content in restaurant meals. Designs with warning text are likely to improve consumer understanding.

Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting.

Importance: Policy makers have implemented beverage taxes to generate revenue and reduce consumption of sweetened drinks. In January 2017, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, became the second US city to implement a beverage excise tax (1.5 cents per ounce). Objectives: To compare changes in beverage prices and sales following the implementation of the tax in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore, Maryland (a control city without a tax) and to assess potential cross-border shopping to avoid the tax in neighboring zip codes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study used a difference-in-differences approach and analyzed sales data to compare changes between January 1, 2016, before the tax, and December 31, 2017, after the tax. Differences by store type, beverage sweetener status, and beverage size were examined. The commercial retailer sales data included large chain store sales in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and the Pennsylvania zip codes bordering Philadelphia. These data reflect approximately 25% of the ounces of taxed beverages sold in Philadelphia. Exposures: Philadelphia's tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in taxed beverage prices and volume sales. Results: A total of 291 stores (54 supermarkets, 20 mass merchandise stores, 217 pharmacies) were analyzed. The mean price per ounce of taxed beverages in Philadelphia increased from 5.43 cents in 2016 to 6.24 cents in 2017 at supermarkets; from 5.28 cents to 6.24 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.60 cents to 8.28 cents at pharmacies. The mean price per ounce in Baltimore increased from 5.33 cents in 2016 to 5.50 cents in 2017 at supermarkets, from 6.34 cents to 6.52 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.76 cents to 6.93 cents at pharmacies. The mean per-ounce difference in price between the 2 cities was 0.65 cents (95% CI, 0.60 cents-0.69 cents; P<.001) at supermarkets; 0.87 cents (95 % CI, 0.72 cents-1.02 cents; P<.001) at mass merchandise stores, and 1.56 cents (95% CI, 1.50 cents-1.62 cents; P<.001) at pharmacies. Total volume sales of taxed beverages in Philadelphia decreased by 1.3 billion ounces (from 2.475 billion to 1.214 billion) or by 51.0% after tax implementation. Volume sales in the Pennsylvania border zip codes, however, increased by 308.2 million ounces (from 713.1 million to 1.021 billion), offsetting the decrease in Philadelphia's volume sales by 24.4%. In Philadelphia, beverage volume sales in ounces per 4-week period between before and after tax periods decreased from 4.85 million to 1.99 million at supermarkets, from 2.98 million to 1.72 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.16 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. In Baltimore, the beverage volume sales in ounces decreased from 2.83 million to 2.81 million at supermarkets, from 1.05 million to 1.00 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.14 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. This was a 58.7% reduction at supermarkets (difference-in-differences, -2.85 million ounces; 95% CI, -4.10 million to -1.60 million ounces; P < .001), 40.4% reduction at mass merchandise stores (difference-in-differences, -1.20 million ounces; 95% CI, -2.04 million to -0.36 million ounces; P = .001), and 12.6% reduction in pharmacies (difference-in-differences, -0.02 million ounces; 95% CI, -0.03 million to -0.01 million ounces; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In Philadelphia in 2017, the implementation of a beverage excise tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages was associated with significantly higher beverage prices and a significant and substantial decline in volume of taxed beverages sold. This decrease in taxed beverage sales volume was partially offset by increases in volume of sales in bordering areas.

Unemployment claims in Philadelphia one year after implementation of the sweetened beverage tax.

OBJECTIVES: Possible adverse economic impacts of sweetened drink taxes are a key concern for numerous stakeholders. This study examined changes in unemployment benefit claims filings in Philadelphia compared to its neighboring counties two years prior to and 14 months post implementation of a 1.5 cents per ounce excise tax on sugar- and artificially-sweetened beverages. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of Labor. Interrupted time series analysis was used to determine if there was a change in new monthly unemployment claims filings post-tax implementation in Philadelphia compared to surrounding counties in supermarkets, select potentially affected industries, and in total claims filings across all industries combined. RESULTS: Results showed there were no statistically significant changes to unemployment claims in Philadelphia compared to neighboring counties for supermarkets (ß = -9.45, 95% CI = -98.11, 79.22), soft drink manufacturers (ß = -0.13, 95% CI = -9.13, 8.88), across other potentially affected industries (ß = 9.16, 95% CI = -488.29, 506.60), or across all industries (ß = -445.85, 95% CI = -4272.39, 3380.68) following implementation of the beverage tax. Unemployment declined similarly in Philadelphia compared to surrounding counties. CONCLUSIONS: Public reports of increased unemployment within the first year following the implementation of the Philadelphia beverage tax are not supported by this analysis. Future work should examine employment outcomes and include longer follow-up periods.

A randomized trial of a multi-level intervention to increase water access and appeal in community recreation centers.

INTRODUCTION: Improving children's tap water intake and reducing sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption is beneficial for health and health equity, particularly in low-income communities and communities of color. Existing community level interventions to improve the intake of tap water have predominantly occurred in schools and have focused on promoting water consumption in cafeterias during lunch or snack periods. METHODS: The "Hydrate Philly" intervention was developed to target multiple environmental and social factors to improve tap water consumption in community recreation centers in low-income communities: replacing old and unappealing water fountains with appealing water-bottle-filling "hydration stations", conducting water safety testing and publicizing results, disseminating reusable water bottles, promoting tap water, and discouraging SSB consumption. Efficacy of the intervention will be tested through a group-randomized controlled trial (n = 28 centers) of the intervention's impact on center-level water fountain/station use as measured by flow meters during a youth summer camp program primarily for children aged 6-12 years. Intervention impact on the primary outcome (use of drinking water sources) will be examined with a difference-in-differences approach using an ordinary least squares regression model for analysis at the center level. Secondary outcomes include SSBs brought to summer camp, reusable and single-use bottled water use, program trash, and recreation center staff SSB consumption. DISCUSSION: Multilevel approaches are needed to increase tap water intake and decrease SSB consumption among low-income and minority youth beyond school and meal settings. The current study describes the Hydrate Philly intervention, the study design, and baseline characteristics of recreation centers participating in the study. ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: #NCT03637465.

Title: efficacy of a food parenting intervention for mothers with low income to reduce preschooler's solid fat and added sugar intakes: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Few interventions have shown efficacy to influence key energy balance behaviors during the preschool years. OBJECTIVE: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was used to evaluate the efficacy of Food, Fun, and Families (FFF), a 12 week authoritative food parenting intervention for mothers with low-income levels, to reduce preschool-aged children's intake of calories from solid fat and added sugar (SoFAS). METHODS: Mothers were randomly assigned to receive FFF (n = 59) or to a delayed treatment control (n = 60). The primary outcome was children's daily energy intake from SoFAS at the end of the 12 week intervention, controlling for baseline levels, assessed by 24-h dietary recalls. Secondary outcomes included children's daily energy intake, children's BMI z-scores, and meal observations of maternal food parenting practices targeted in FFF (e.g. providing guided choices). RESULTS: Participating mothers were predominantly African American (91%), with 39% educated beyond high school and 66% unemployed. Baseline demographics and child SoFAS intakes did not differ by group. Lost to follow-up was 13% and did not differ between groups. At post-intervention, FFF children consumed ~ 94 kcal or 23% less daily energy from SoFAS than children in the control group, adjusting for baseline levels (307.8 (95%CI = 274.1, 341.5) kcal vs. 401.9 (95%CI = 369.8, 433.9) kcal, FFF vs. control; p < 0.001). FFF mothers also displayed a greater number of authoritative parenting practices when observed post-intervention with their child at a buffet-style meal (Wilcoxon z = - 2.54, p = 0.012). Neither child total daily energy intake nor BMI z-scores differed between groups post-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate the initial efficacy of an authoritative food parenting intervention for families with low-income to reduce SoFAS intake in early childhood. Additional research is needed to evaluate longer-term effects on diet and growth. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov : #NCT03646201.

Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting.

Importance: Policy makers have implemented beverage taxes to generate revenue and reduce consumption of sweetened drinks. In January 2017, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, became the second US city to implement a beverage excise tax (1.5 cents per ounce). Objectives: To compare changes in beverage prices and sales following the implementation of the tax in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore, Maryland (a control city without a tax) and to assess potential cross-border shopping to avoid the tax in neighboring zip codes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study used a difference-in-differences approach and analyzed sales data to compare changes between January 1, 2016, before the tax, and December 31, 2017, after the tax. Differences by store type, beverage sweetener status, and beverage size were examined. The commercial retailer sales data included large chain store sales in Philadelphia, Baltimore, and the Pennsylvania zip codes bordering Philadelphia. These data reflect approximately 25% of the ounces of taxed beverages sold in Philadelphia. Exposures: Philadelphia's tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change in taxed beverage prices and volume sales. Results: A total of 291 stores (54 supermarkets, 20 mass merchandise stores, 217 pharmacies) were analyzed. The mean price per ounce of taxed beverages in Philadelphia increased from 5.43 cents in 2016 to 6.24 cents in 2017 at supermarkets; from 5.28 cents to 6.24 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.60 cents to 8.28 cents at pharmacies. The mean price per ounce in Baltimore increased from 5.33 cents in 2016 to 5.50 cents in 2017 at supermarkets, from 6.34 cents to 6.52 cents at mass merchandise stores, and from 6.76 cents to 6.93 cents at pharmacies. The mean per-ounce difference in price between the 2 cities was 0.65 cents (95% CI, 0.60 cents-0.69 cents; P<.001) at supermarkets; 0.87 cents (95 % CI, 0.72 cents-1.02 cents; P<.001) at mass merchandise stores, and 1.56 cents (95% CI, 1.50 cents-1.62 cents; P<.001) at pharmacies. Total volume sales of taxed beverages in Philadelphia decreased by 1.3 billion ounces (from 2.475 billion to 1.214 billion) or by 51.0% after tax implementation. Volume sales in the Pennsylvania border zip codes, however, increased by 308.2 million ounces (from 713.1 million to 1.021 billion), offsetting the decrease in Philadelphia's volume sales by 24.4%. In Philadelphia, beverage volume sales in ounces per 4-week period between before and after tax periods decreased from 4.85 million to 1.99 million at supermarkets, from 2.98 million to 1.72 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.16 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. In Baltimore, the beverage volume sales in ounces decreased from 2.83 million to 2.81 million at supermarkets, from 1.05 million to 1.00 million at mass merchandise stores, and from 0.14 million to 0.13 million at pharmacies. This was a 58.7% reduction at supermarkets (difference-in-differences, -2.85 million ounces; 95% CI, -4.10 million to -1.60 million ounces; P < .001), 40.4% reduction at mass merchandise stores (difference-in-differences, -1.20 million ounces; 95% CI, -2.04 million to -0.36 million ounces; P = .001), and 12.6% reduction in pharmacies (difference-in-differences, -0.02 million ounces; 95% CI, -0.03 million to -0.01 million ounces; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In Philadelphia in 2017, the implementation of a beverage excise tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages was associated with significantly higher beverage prices and a significant and substantial decline in volume of taxed beverages sold. This decrease in taxed beverage sales volume was partially offset by increases in volume of sales in bordering areas.

Tracking and Variability in Childhood Levels of BMI: The Bogalusa Heart Study.

OBJECTIVE: Although the tracking of BMI levels from childhood to adulthood has been examined, there is little information on the within-person variability of BMI. METHODS: Longitudinal data from 11,591 schoolchildren, 3,096 of whom were reexamined as adults, were used to explore the tracking and variability of BMI levels. This article focuses on changes in age-adjusted levels of BMI. RESULTS: There was strong tracking of BMI levels. The correlation of adjusted BMI levels was r = 0.88, and 78% of children with severe obesity at one examination had severe obesity at the next examination (mean interval, 2.7 years). Further, an increase in adjusted BMI from +5 kg/m2 (above the median) to + 10 increased the risk for adult BMI ≥ 40 by 2.7-fold. However, BMI levels among children and adolescents were variable. Over a 9- to 15-month interval, the SD of adjusted BMI change was 0.9 kg/m2 , and 0.7% of children had an absolute change ≥ 3.5. This variability was associated with the interval between examinations and with the initial BMI. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high degree of tracking of BMI, annual changes of 3.5 kg/m2 or more are plausible. Knowledge of this variability is important when following a child over time.