Do students compensate for school beverage laws? Evidence that removing soda from schools is not enough

Introduction: Many states have policies governing the availability of soda in schools, but some allow other sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs). Such policies may not reduce SSB consumption if students compensate by replacing soda with other SSBs (e.g., sports drinks). We compared adolescent SSB purchasing and consumption in states that restrict soda vs. restrictions on all SSBs. Methods: State policies were obtained from legal research databases, through the Bridging the Gap research program. States were categorized as having no policy, policies governing soda only, and policies governing all SSBs. Data on within-school SSB purchasing and overall SSB consumption within the past week were collected from 6,898 eighth-grade public school students in 40 states, participating in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. General linear models estimated differences between policy categories in the prevalence of SSB purchasing and consumption, adjusted for student sociodemographics, state obesity prevalence, and state clustering. Results: In states with no policy, 27.2% of students purchased SSBs in school. The prevalence was similar in states with policies governing soda (difference = 1.1, 95% CI: -3.8, 6.1) but lower in states that governed all SSBs (difference = -7.8, 95% CI: -11.5, -4.1). Overall consumption did not differ across state policy categories, however, as 84-86% of students in each category reported consuming SSBs. Discussion: State policies governing school beverages appear effective in reducing adolescents' within-school SSB purchasing only if they target all SSBs (not just soda). Nonetheless, overall SSB consumption remains elevated even in states that restrict SSBs in school.