The Proliferation Of Ultra-Processed Foods (UPFs) And Their Deceptive Advertising Pose A Severe Threat To Public Health In India. In Light Of The Supreme Court's Observations On The Right To Health, Discuss The Need For A Robust Regulatory Framework Over Self-regulation By The Food Industry. (15 Marks, 250 Words)

Q. The proliferation of Ultra-Processed Foods (UPFs) and their deceptive advertising pose a severe threat to public health in India. In light of the Supreme Court’s observations on the Right to Health, discuss the need for a robust regulatory framework over self-regulation by the food industry. (15 Marks, 250 Words)

June 22, 2026

GS Paper IISocial Justice

Core Demand of the Question

Public health risks from UPFs and misleading advertising
Limitations of self-regulation by the food industry
Need for legally enforceable regulations and policy measures

Answer

Introduction

The rise of Ultra-Processed Foods (UPFs), heavily marketed through television, social media, and influencer endorsements, has coincided with increasing obesity, diabetes, and non-communicable diseases in India. Despite government initiatives like the National Multisectoral Action Plan (2017-2022), self-regulation by food corporations has proven inadequate. The Supreme Court has reinforced the right to health under Article 21, advocating for effective front-of-pack labelling and stricter advertising norms.

UPSC Coaching Classes

Public Health Risks and Advertising Challenges

Deceptive marketing : UPFs emphasize selective attributes (e.g., “baked”, “multi-grain”) while hiding high sugar, salt, or fat content.
Eg: A 2026 YouTube ad for baked chips omitted key ingredients like maltodextrin and emulsifiers.
Child-targeted exposure : Marketing via TV, social media, and influencer campaigns increases consumption among children and adolescents.
Eg: India recorded almost ~₹170 crore spent on advertising for junk food ads in 2025-26.
Health impact : Consumption of UPFs is linked to obesity, hypertension, type-2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.
Eg: The Lancet Series on UPFs (2025) provides evidence of displacement of healthy diets by industrially processed foods.

Limitations of Self-Regulation

Voluntary codes : These often fail due to lack of enforcement and transparency.
Eg : the FSSAI’s comprehensive ban on “100% Pure” or “100% Natural” claims on food labels. This regulatory crackdown proved that corporate brands routinely use deceptive “health-washing” catchphrases on the front of their packs until legally forced to strip them off.
Misleading endorsements: Self-regulation does not prevent misleading endorsements by celebrities or brands targeting vulnerable populations.

Need for a Robust Regulatory Framework

Legally enforceable advertising restrictions : Ban or limit child-targeted promotions and require disclosure of nutritional risks.
Eg: Supreme Court observations in 2024–26 emphasized front-of-pack labelling for informed consumer choice.
Integrated policy approach : Combine regulation with public awareness, school-based interventions, and fiscal measures such as HFSS taxation.
Eg: Chile and Mexico have shown effective reductions in UPF consumption via enforceable regulations over voluntary codes.

Click to Know UPSC Offline Courses

Conclusion

The Right to Health demands proactive state intervention beyond self-regulation. Robust legal frameworks, front-of-pack labelling, advertising restrictions, and fiscal and educational measures are necessary to curb the health hazards of UPFs, protect children, and promote sustainable, informed food consumption in India.

Check Out UPSC CSE Books

Visit PW Store