What's in a Word Like 'Fresh'?
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has recently increased its scrutiny of marketing terms used on packaged foods. Words like 'fresh', 'natural', '100% pure', and 'healthy' are now under the regulatory microscope. According to FSSAI's
Advertising and Claims Regulations of 2018, such terms are conditional and must be scientifically substantiated. For instance, a product can only be called 'fresh' if it has undergone minimal processing like washing or chilling. This crackdown has led several brands to revise their packaging after receiving notices from the regulator for potentially misleading consumers. This move isn't just about semantics; it's a response to the growing concern that these 'health halos' can make a product seem healthier than it is, encouraging overconsumption.
The Bigger Picture: Front-of-Pack vs. Back-of-Pack
This focus on specific words is part of a decade-long debate in India about the best way to display nutritional information. For years, the only source of truth has been the detailed Nutrition Information Panel—the small grid of numbers on the back of the pack. While comprehensive, it can be difficult and time-consuming for shoppers to decipher. To solve this, public health advocates and the World Health Organisation have pushed for Front-of-Pack Labelling (FoPL). FoPL systems use simple, at-a-glance graphics on the front of packages to quickly communicate whether a product is high in fat, sugar, and salt (HFSS). The idea is to help consumers make healthier choices in the few seconds they spend deciding on a product.
The Push for Simplicity: Warning Labels and Star Ratings
There are two leading models for FoPL. The first is a warning label system, favoured by many public health groups, which uses clear, unambiguous text like 'High in Sugar'. This requires no interpretation. The second model is a summary rating, like the Health Star Rating used in Australia. In 2022, FSSAI proposed its own version called the Indian Nutrition Rating (INR), which would rate foods from a half-star (least healthy) to five stars (healthiest). This system calculates a score based on negative nutrients (fat, sugar, salt) and positive ones (protein, fibre, fruits). Proponents argue these simple systems are essential tools to combat rising rates of obesity and diabetes in India.
The Case for Detail and The Industry's Stance
On the other side of the debate, many food industry bodies and some experts argue that FoPL oversimplifies nutrition and can unfairly penalise certain foods, including traditional Indian products. They contend that the existing back-of-pack nutrition panel provides all the necessary information for consumers who want to make an informed choice. The fear is that a simplistic red warning label or a low star rating could scare consumers away from products that can be perfectly acceptable as part of a balanced diet. This has led to a significant pushback, with industry groups often favouring either no change or a more interpretive system like star ratings over stark warning labels.
An Issue Before the Supreme Court
The debate over FoPL has been ongoing since 2014, marked by numerous expert panels and stakeholder consultations without a final decision. The delay has been attributed to a lack of consensus between public health advocates and the food industry. The matter has even reached the Supreme Court, which in early 2026 directed FSSAI to expedite a final framework. In a recent development in August 2026, FSSAI proposed a new format to the court: a nutrition table on the front that shows a product's nutrient content alongside the recommended daily limits for sugar, fat, and salt, leaving consumers to do the calculation themselves. This latest proposal has drawn criticism from public health experts for moving away from the simple, interpretive labels the court had previously indicated it favoured. As recently as July 2026, a Parliamentary panel also urged FSSAI to finalize and notify the FoPL rules without further delay.
