बेबाक · Editorial
FSSAI's Notices to Nestlé, Zydus Wellness and Infant Formula Makers Must Become Settled Rules
Asking Complan to prove '2 times faster growth' is the right instinct. Parents need standing rules on evidence for nutrition claims, not occasional notices.
What the regulator did
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has issued notices to Nestlé and Zydus Wellness over claims about infant nutrition products and Complan. The regulator has asked for evidence behind the claim that Complan promotes '2 times faster growth'. A separate report says FSSAI announced in a social media post that it had also issued notices to Abbott, Ira Fathima, Nutricia International and Mead Johnson Nutrition (India) over advertisements on Instagram. That report describes the ads as illegal. That is the regulator's position, and the companies' responses have not been reported.
The core tension
Health and nutrition claims sell food. Few claims sell better than those about a child's growth, because few buyers are more anxious than parents. A phrase like '2 times faster growth' tells a parent that the ordinary meal at home is not enough. Companies are entitled to market their products, but how far that freedom extends depends on the evidence behind the claim. The notices put that question in its proper place. The issue is not whether the products are safe. It is whether the promises made about them can be proven.
Both sides, fairly stated
The companies have a reasonable case. Formulated nutrition products are lawful, and the claims made for them may well rest on research the firms can produce. A notice is a question, not a finding of guilt, and the firms should be allowed to submit their data before anyone judges them. The regulator's case is just as strong. When a claim concerns how fast an infant or a child grows, the company making it should carry the burden of proof. Parents cannot test such claims at home. Instagram advertising reaches young parents directly, and it is fair to ask whether it receives the same scrutiny as print and television.
Our verdict
FSSAI is right to ask, and right to ask in public. It is also right to treat Instagram advertising with the same seriousness as advertising on the packet. A claim about a child's growth is a promise to a parent, and a promise that cannot be proven should never have been made. Still, a notice is not a policy. If these notices end quietly, with an adjusted slogan and no public record, the market will learn that the cost of an inflated claim is one letter that eventually goes away.
The way forward
FSSAI should publish what each company submits in response and what it decides on the '2 times faster growth' claim and the Instagram advertisements. It should then set a standing rule for growth and development claims on child nutrition products. Such claims should be allowed only with evidence filed before the advertisement runs, not defended after a notice arrives. The same standard should cover digital ads and paid promotions, with clear labelling. Enforcement should be the same for a multinational and a domestic firm. Parents in every income group deserve claims they can trust.
A claim about a child's growth is a promise to a parent, and a promise that cannot be proven should never have been made.
What this editorial rests on
Drawn from our live multi-newsroom feed — read the reporting at source.
An editorial is the considered opinion of the FarziUPSC desk, argued from the sourced reporting above and written under our published persona, बेबाक. We name institutions, not parties. If we are wrong, we will say so. How we work →