FSSAI’s proposed warning labels could let unhealthy foods escape scrutiny, says expert
Under the proposal to have red hexagonal warning labels on packaged foods, areas requiring scrutiny include the nutrient threshold, the timeline of the second phase, the definition of HFSS (foods high in fat, sugar, salt), the use of ‘added’ nutrients, the size of the warning label, and exemptions
Dr. Arun Gupta, convenor of Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest, has criticized the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India's proposed warning labels for unhealthy packaged foods. While the initiative marks progress following a push by the Supreme Court, Dr. Gupta argues that the "two or more" nutrients threshold in the proposal is a significant loophole.
He contends that a product could be high in sugar but still lack a warning if it is low in fat and salt, which contradicts the purpose of the warning label. Dr. Gupta also calls for a simplified approach: "High in sugar - warning; high in salt - warning; high in saturated fat - warning." Additionally, he emphasizes the need for time-bound implementation and alignment with the Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute of Nutrition's Dietary Guidelines.
Dr. Gupta also questions the use of "added" nutrients and the size of the warning label, advocating for a clear, scientifically robust definition of high fat, sugar, and salt foods and ensuring the label's visibility by matching its size to the principal display area of the package.
Written by urgent.news from The Hindu's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
