Thanks to the Supreme Court’s persistent and stern prodding, India’s food quality and safety regulator has come up with a proposal for Front-of-Pack (FoP) warning labels for packaged food products high in saturated fat, added sugar or salt.
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) kept dragging its feet on the court’s advice regarding the introduction of FoP labels. Things came to such a sorry pass that the court had to ask if the regulator was succumbing to industry pressure.
On the face of it, the proposed FoP label appears to be a step in the right direction, though consumer activists might want some tweaks or improvements. The interpretative FoP warning label helps consumers figure out if packaged food contains high levels of certain nutrients linked to health risks.
The label will be a red hexagon with names of nutrients that exceed the limits set in the 2024 dietary guidelines of the ICMR-National Institute of Nutrition. In the proposed method, food packets must carry warnings if they contain any two or more of the three target ingredients – namely, added saturated fat, added sugar and salt.
The FSSAI proposal comes at a critical juncture as FMCG giants have been aggressively promoting packaged foods and beverages linked to the rise in non-communicable diseases such as diabetes, hypertension and obesity. These companies are accused of deliberately deploying ingenious and unscrupulous psychological techniques in their marketing and advertising campaigns to thwart the critical faculties of consumers and goad them into impulsive buying and consumption. Studies have shown the misuse of wellness buzzwords or green packaging to lure gullible consumers into believing their claims. Similarly, associating junk food consumption with emotions such as joy or fear, or tying it to personal identity or family happiness, are other tricks in their playbook. To counter the dubious strategy of corporate giants that prioritises profit over public health, warning labels have been introduced in many countries. The Supreme Court opined that colour-coded labels help consumers make informed decisions and should be introduced in India.
Predictably, this idea has met with strong resistance from the powerful industry lobby. Their arguments range from labels being ineffective to labels lacking nuance and therefore being misleading. There are hardly any takers, as these arguments do not stand up to scrutiny.
Despite the initial dithering and subsequent dilly-dallying, FSSAI’s idea of calibrated implementation seems pragmatic and would give the industry the required time to adjust. The proposal envisages two phases – a first phase for products high in two or more specified nutrients, and a second phase covering products high even in one of the nutrients.
Another laudable initiative being implemented in some states is banning the advertising and sale of high-fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) junk food not only in schools and colleges but also in their vicinity. But merely prohibiting sale or cutting access will not solve the problem. Health experts and educationists have been advocating innovative campaigns on nutritional awareness in schools so that children are weaned away from junk food. Even for labelling to work, the government and civil society organisations should conduct awareness and behaviour-change campaigns. A strong, concerted social campaign will bring corporations around to practising ethical business that enables a “healthy” profit.