Snehi Chhabra, B.A.(Hons.) Criminology


FSSAI’s move to mandate scientific evidence for food safety and product claims from January 2026 is a much-needed and commendable step, particularly in the Indian context where food claims have often relied more on marketing language than scientific proof. Shifting the burden of safety entirely onto food business operators is likely to improve accountability and raise overall food standards.

 

The requirement that evidence be tailored to Indian dietary patterns and portion sizes is especially important. It acknowledges that consumer safety cannot be assessed using generic global data and must reflect local consumption realities.

 

However, two concerns remain. First, while the policy ensures transparency between companies and the regulator, it does not adequately address transparency toward the public. Since these products are ultimately consumed by people, limited public disclosure such as safety summaries or claim-verification outcomes could strengthen consumer trust. Regulation should operate as a three-way circuit between the government, companies, and consumers, not merely a bilateral exchange.

 

Second, the framework largely applies to new products, while those already in the market will not undergo mandatory re-evaluation unless a specific concern is raised. While it may be impractical to test every existing product, the absence of a structured or risk-based review mechanism leaves a gap, especially where legacy products may already be causing harm.

 

Overall, the policy is a strong step in the right direction. Its success, however, will depend on whether transparency is extended to consumers and whether existing products are meaningfully addressed alongside future ones.

 

 

 

(These are the personal views of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of OP Jindal Global University or its affiliated institutions)