The Lift Line
“The Supreme Court will need to set the bar high in the interest of people’s health and future generations.”
Why This Editorial Matters for Your Exam
Rajib Dasgupta, chairperson of the Centre of Social Medicine and Community Health, Jawaharlal Nehru University, writes as the front-of-pack labelling case reaches a decisive stage. The piece introduces the WHO’s idea of commercial determinants of health, a strong keyword for GS2 health answers. For background on FSSAI’s labelling proposal, see the 2 September editorial; this column adds the data on consumption and the political economy of industry influence.
GS Paper 2: Issues relating to health; regulatory bodies. GS Paper 3: Food processing; consumer protection.
Background and Context
The case and the proposal, as the author describes them. In a public interest litigation, the Supreme Court has ordered the Centre to implement, through FSSAI, a front-of-pack regime of warning labels on packaged foods. In its latest affidavit, FSSAI proposed a single-phase approach: a red hexagon on a white square to warn when a product is high in fat, sugar or salt (HFSS). Activists earlier objected to a proposal to warn only when two nutrients are high, calling it an “industry-friendly loophole”.
The data the author cites.
| Indicator | Earlier | Latest |
|---|---|---|
| Obesity, men aged 15-49 (NFHS) | 23 per cent (2019-21) | 27 per cent (2023-24) |
| Obesity, women aged 15-49 (NFHS) | 24 per cent | 31 per cent |
| Share of monthly spending on processed food, rural | 7.9 per cent (2011-12) | 9.8 per cent (2023-24) |
| Share, urban | 9 per cent | 11.1 per cent |
| Ultra-processed food retail sales, CAGR 2011-21 (WHO-ICRIER) | 13.37 per cent |
Types of front-of-pack labels.
| Type | Example |
|---|---|
| Warning labels | Chile (black octagons, 2016), Mexico, Brazil |
| Traffic-light labels | UK (voluntary), Sri Lanka (sugar-sweetened beverages from 2016, extended to HFSS in 2019) |
| Summary ratings | Health Star Rating (Australia, New Zealand); Indian Nutrition Rating, FSSAI’s earlier star-based proposal (2022) |
The Analysis
1. Obesity is rising fast. Between the last two National Family Health Surveys, obesity among adults aged 15-49 rose for both men and women; processed food takes a growing share of household budgets.
2. The labelling debate is a decade old. An expert group set up under the Delhi High Court’s directions about ten years ago asked FSSAI to strengthen labelling with complete information on fat, sugar and salt and recommended daily limits.
3. Front of pack beats back of pack. The WHO prefers FOPL; traffic lights help quick decisions and push reformulation, though effects depend on design, demographics and retail settings.
4. Commercial determinants of health. The WHO puts HFSS foods with tobacco, alcohol and fossil fuels: sectors of large firms that “can and do” influence political decisions. The ultra-processed food sector is growing fast; the packaged food industry is projected to grow from Rs 10,180 billion (FY2024) to Rs 17,120 billion (FY2029).
5. The industry playbook. A 2022 study in The Lancet Regional Health-Southeast Asia documented interference that delayed and weakened labels in Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam. A Reuters report says FSSAI “buckled” after a tense March meeting with industry. Tactics include challenging science, reputation management and litigation.
Data and Institutions Vault
Prelims-grade facts:
Regulation:
- FSSAI: statutory body under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, Ministry of Health.
- Labelling rules: FSS (Labelling and Display) Regulations, 2020.
- HFSS: high in fat, sugar or salt; Eat Right India movement (2018).
Global examples:
- Chile: black octagon warnings, 2016; Sri Lanka: traffic lights, 2016 (beverages), 2019 (HFSS).
- WHO: “commercial determinants of health” framework.
Surveys:
- NFHS is conducted by the IIPS, Mumbai for the Health Ministry; HCES 2023-24 by the NSO.
⚠️ Watch the trap: The Indian Nutrition Rating (health stars) was FSSAI’s 2022 draft approach; the proposal now before the Supreme Court is a warning label (red hexagon), a different design.
The Debate
For the author’s view. Clear warnings help consumers and push reformulation; industry’s resistance follows a pattern seen worldwide, and regulators must not yield to it.
The complications. Industry argues symbols are simplistic and may stigmatise traditional products; small firms face costs of relabelling; and labels alone do not change diets without price, availability and awareness measures.
The balanced verdict. Adopt a simple, evidence-based warning for all HFSS foods, with thresholds set by independent experts; combine it with marketing limits for children and reformulation targets; and make the rule-making transparent.
How to Think About This
Look for who shapes the rule. In any regulatory question, ask whose interests shape the design: consumers, producers, regulators, courts. The “commercial determinants of health” frame gives you language for that analysis in health answers.
Diagram-in-Words
Takeaway Box
- Peg: Supreme Court-directed front-of-pack warnings; FSSAI’s red hexagon proposal.
- Data: obesity up in NFHS; processed food share of spending up (HCES).
- Concept: WHO’s commercial determinants of health.
- Evidence: industry delays in Southeast Asia; Sri Lanka’s regime since 2016.
- Ask: a high bar in the public interest.
Sources: The Indian Express, FSSAI, WHO, commercial determinants of health
Source: Food Labels Against Obesity: Front-of-Pack Warnings and the Commercial Determinants of Health — Ujiyari.com | Free UPSC & State PCS Editorial Analysis
