CHECK THE SUGAR

Controversy on Nestle should lead to tightening of rules and plugging regulatory gaps in infant food market

ASTUDY INCRIMINATING the multinational food company Nestle for adding unhealthy amounts of sugar to its baby products has generated concerns in the country. Last week, the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) and the Switzerland-based investigating agency, Public Eye, alleged that the company added 2.7 g of sugar per serving to its baby food brand, Cerelac, destined for developing countries, including India. Nestle has defended itself and said that it has reduced added sugar in its baby food products in India by over 30 per cent over the past five years. The ball is now in the court of the country’s food business regulator, the FSSAI. The agency has begun investigations into the findings of the IBFAN and Public Eye study. That’s a step in the right direction and Nestle must be held to account. Ensuring that the child food market doesn’t compromise with nutritional standards, however, demands much more than scrutinising one company — however large. As the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights has demanded, the FSSAI probe should cover all baby food manufacturers.

The first two years are critical for the growth and development of children. It’s a period when children consume a limited amount of food. The calories shouldn’t, therefore, be wasted in items that have no nutritive value — added sugar, as experts rightly say, is “empty calories”. Breastfed children get sugar from the lactose in their mother’s milk anyway. The diet in the first 24 months is also critical in another way. Added sugar in infant food is often the cause of cravings later in childhood. Studies have also shown that children fed a sugar-heavy diet are more likely to develop obesity, cardiovascular diseases and tooth decay compared to children who eat balanced meals. The risks to Indian children are well documented. The country has the highest number of childhood diabetes cases in the world. In March, a Lancet study revealed that more than 12 million children in India between five and 19 were grossly overweight.

Indian regulations do prescribe micronutrient requirements for baby foods. However, they do not specify an upper limit for added sugars. The rules do not bar the use of corn syrup and malt in food for children and allow sucrose and fructose to be used as carbohydrate sources, provided they constitute less than 20 per cent of the total carbohydrates in the food. The controversy around Nestle should lead to debates on the quality of products in the market for children and catalyse the tightening of rules and plugging regulatory gaps.