When imported Lotus Biscoff biscuits commanded premium prices in India, consumers paid for perceived quality. Now, with local manufacturing bringing prices down dramatically, the drop reflects more than economies of scale. Consumer reviews reveal products manufactured in Belgium taste distinctly different from those made in India, with many noting locally produced versions taste inferior despite company claims of identical recipes.
This extends beyond one brand. Multinational corporations routinely use different ingredient standards for products sold in Western markets versus those made for Indian consumers. While companies insist they comply with local regulations, the uncomfortable truth is that compliance with India's food safety standards often falls short of protecting consumer health.
The Ingredient Substitution Pattern
Comparing ingredient labels tells a revealing story. Products manufactured for the US market list sunflower oil or canola oil. The same products made in India substitute palm oil or refined palmolein. Better quality flours used abroad give way to refined flour in Indian variants.
The economics are straightforward. Palm oil costs significantly less than sunflower or mustard oil. For manufacturers processing massive volumes annually, this translates into substantial savings. However, the health implications are significant. Refined palm oil delivers primarily saturated fats with minimal beneficial fatty acids. Studies correlate diets heavy in palm oil with increased cardiovascular disease risk. Refined flour causes rapid blood sugar spikes, contributing to India's rising diabetes burden.
The Food Pharmer Case Study
When health influencer Revant Himatsingka, operating as "Food Pharmer," exposed Bournvita's high sugar content through a viral video, he became an overnight sensation and a corporate target. The video garnered millions of views on Instagram before being taken down.
Mondelez India sent a legal notice forcing him to remove the content, and his Twitter account was permanently suspended. But the damage to Bournvita's image was done. The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights issued directives to Bournvita to remove misleading advertisements, and the company subsequently launched a reformulated range with reduced sugar content.
Himatsingka, a Wharton MBA and former McKinsey consultant who quit his US job to pursue this mission, has since faced relentless corporate pushback. He received multiple legal notices and a defamation suit worth crores. Major brands including Dabur, PepsiCo, Nestlé, and Triguni Foods have sent legal notices, attempting to silence his criticism through corporate intimidation rather than addressing the issues he raises.
Yet his impact has been undeniable. Following his criticism, Dabur reduced sugar in Real Juice, Nestlé reduced sugar in Maggi ketchup, and Lay's switched to sunflower oil for producing chips. His "Label Padhega India" campaign has sparked nationwide discussion, and schools have adopted his educational materials to teach children about food labels.
When activists like Food Pharmer face legal intimidation for exposing these practices, it signals that companies prioritize profit protection over product improvement
Operating from personal savings and relying on pro-bono lawyers, Himatsingka has declined brand promotion offers to maintain credibility. His case exemplifies how consumer activists exposing weak regulatory parameters face legal harassment rather than support.
The Regulatory Gap
The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India operates with far fewer product standards compared to countries with robust frameworks. Recent surveys reveal widespread public distrust in FSSAI's effectiveness.
States face acute shortages of food safety officers. The authority remains underfunded relative to its mandate. FSSAI has not comprehensively revised safety standards in over a decade despite proliferation of new products and processing technologies.
Recent spice contamination scandals exposed these gaps. When prominent brands faced global scrutiny for contamination, nationwide testing found numerous samples failing safety standards. FSSAI cancelled licenses for many producers, revealing how easily substandard products had entered the market.
Misleading Labels Persist
FSSAI has recently intensified efforts against misleading marketing. It ordered removal of false juice claims from reconstituted products where water is the primary ingredient. It directed companies categorizing milk-based beverages as "health drinks" to recategorize their products, noting "health drink" isn't even defined under food safety laws.
Recently, FSSAI banned the misleading use of medical terminology on food labels, withdrawing earlier permissions that confused consumers. Major brands renamed their products from "health food drinks" to less misleading categories.
However, these changes address labeling rather than formulation. Products claiming fresh ingredients contain fine print disclaiming such claims are for marketing purposes only. Companies use high sweetness levels and artificial flavoring agents while technically meeting minimum regulatory standards.
The Path Forward
New FSSAI mandates require submissions seeking safety reviews to follow standardized formats with scientific data. However, these measures address symptoms rather than root causes. Food quality remains primarily a compliance matter rather than a public health imperative.
Meaningful reform requires substantially increased funding and personnel for FSSAI, comprehensive updating of food safety standards, standardized inspection procedures, and power to conduct regular unannounced testing of market products rather than relying on industry submissions.
The government's responsibility extends beyond setting standards to enforcing them rigorously. Indian consumers deserve the same quality standards that protect their counterparts in developed markets. Until regulatory frameworks match industry sophistication and resources, the dual standards problem persists with Indian consumers receiving inferior products while paying with their health.
For a nation aspiring to become a manufacturing powerhouse, accepting that "Made in India" signifies compromised quality in packaged food is unacceptable. The choice before policymakers is clear: strengthen enforcement to match global standards, or accept continued compromise on public health. Nobody should be able to fool us simply because our legal parameters are weak and poorly enforced.