The advocacy group Nutrition Advocacy for Public Interest (NAPi) has rejected as inadequate and evasive the response it received from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) to its August demand for a ban on junk food advertising, saying the government's reply sidesteps every substantive demand raised by the country's leading doctors and public health experts.
On August 9, 2026, 32 of India's most eminent doctors and public health experts had issued a public statement titled "Take the Lead: Ban the Advertisements of Junk Food Products," calling for decisive government action to curb the aggressive marketing of junk food, particularly to children. The statement received wide coverage in the national media and was formally sent, through a letter dated August 10, 2026, to the Union Minister of Health and Family Welfare and the Minister of Information and Broadcasting.
The letter made three specific demands. First, it sought a watershed ban on advertising of high fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) and ultra-processed food products between 6 am and 11 pm across television, print, digital, streaming and social media platforms, a measure that NAPi noted had itself been recommended by the government's own Economic Survey 2025-26. Second, it asked for comprehensive marketing regulations that would prohibit celebrity endorsements, the use of cartoon characters, child-directed promotions, influencer marketing, promotional incentives and giveaways, school-based promotions, sponsorship of sports, and price-based inducements such as "buy one get one free" offers. Third, it demanded enforcement of healthy food environments in schools, including a ban on the sale of sugary beverages and HFSS products in school canteens and vending machines.
FSSAI's response, received on September 15, 2026, cites the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018, which lay down general principles requiring advertising claims to be truthful, unambiguous, meaningful and not misleading. It also refers to the Food Safety and Standards (Safe Food and Balanced Diets for Children in School) Regulations, 2020, and mentions the government's "Eat Right India" campaign.
NAPi has said this response amounts to evasion. In its rebuttal, the group points out that the government's reply does not commit to a watershed ban on junk food advertising despite this being a recommendation of the Economic Survey 2025-26 itself. It does not address the demand to prohibit celebrity endorsements, child-directed promotions, cartoon characters, influencer marketing, sports sponsorships or "buy one get one free" offers. It gives no timeline for initiating any regulatory changes. It does not clarify whether any steps have been taken to amend the Advertisement Code or the Norms of Journalistic Conduct, as had been proposed under the National Multisectoral Action Plan (NMAP) 2017-22. And it cites existing regulations without acknowledging that their enforcement is widely recognised to be inadequate.
"General principles are not specific, enforceable restrictions. The existence of regulations is not evidence of compliance. And a campaign like 'Eat Right India' is not a substitute for regulatory action," NAPi said in its response, adding that the government already has the evidence, the recommendations and the mandate to act, and what is missing is the will.
The exchange is documented across four key papers: the original NAPi statement of August 2026, the letters sent to the Union Minister for Health and Family Welfare and the Minister for Information and Broadcasting, and FSSAI's response.
Dr. Arun Gupta, Founder of the Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India (BPNI), Convenor of NAPi, and a former member of the Prime Minister's Council on India's Nutrition Challenges, has been the lead signatory pressing the government on the issue. NAPi has indicated that it will continue to press for a time-bound commitment from the government on the watershed ban and the accompanying marketing restrictions, rather than accept references to existing frameworks as a substitute for new regulatory action.
Comments