The doctors also seem to have ignored the Danish fat tax failure, unless they think the problem was taxing fat, not sugar. Danes introduced a classless fat tax, which of course meant gourmet cheeses and butter got hit the highest, and many Danes simply took to fat tax evasion trips into Germany to stock up on their favourite foods. Doctors in the UK presumably think a sugar tax could only target the products they disapprove of (not be based on all simple sugars in products) and would avoid encouraging people to shop internationally (Northern Ireland would be home to a new black market in smuggled Coca Cola). Policy experts? Hardly.
You see, if the health profession wanted to go further it could suggest banning certain foods, it could suggest subsidising others, it could suggest rationing or other measures to restrict individual freedom. Yet it knows it can't go that far, yet. However, the more state intervention that happens, and fails to deliver (which this surely would do), how much more is needed?
I'd argue that if all subsidies for buses were scrapped, especially for children, then suddenly many people from poor backgrounds would walk further and lose weight, but that would be seen as being "mean" - yet taxing their drinks more is just "fine". However, I wouldn't do it to tackle obesity, I'd do it because there is no good reason to subsidise people's particular travelling habits.
Notice my measure reduces the size of the state (by reducing taxpayer spending), but the health professionals want more government.
People do, fundamentally, have the right to eat, drink, smoke and idle themselves to an early grave. People also have the right to make products and sell them to consenting adults who want to do the same.