Junk Alert

In the sixties and seventies, alcohol and tobacco were wrecking havoc on the health of the people, and doctors and policy makers alike were just waking up to the fact  that serious health repercussions could result due to these habits/ addictions. It took a long and hard fought battle with the powerful opposing lobby to implement  restrictions and bans on the availability, sale, advertisements of its products, as well as the need to educate the public about the ill effects. In the twenty-first century, we have a new frontier – the sale and availability of junk-food. An NGO called Uday Foundation has filed a PIL seeking a ban on junk food availability in schools and 500 yards around them.

WHY DO WE NEED THIS PIL?

We all know that junk food is harmful. Indeed, its effects such as obesity, blood pressure, heart disease, early diabetes are known. What is less known is that as far back as 2001, research had demonstrated that junk-food eating is addictive and causes changes in the brain that mimics the pattern seen in heroin and cocaine addicts with similar “withdrawal” pattern of mood swings, irritation, depression, etc. making it difficult to stop eating. Junk food consumption in excess during pregnancy is as harmful as smoking to  the unborn baby. When pregnant mothers binge on junk food, their babies have a higher chance of being addicted to junk food and developing obesity, lethargy, early  diabetes, etc. Among other effects, junk food also reduces sperm count and causes polycystic ovary disease (causing infertility, acne, hairiness).

SCENARIO IN INDIA

In India, 20% of school-going children are obese, and an equal number are overweight. The rates of early blood pressure, diabetes, high cholesterol are steadily rising. By exposing school children to junk food early in life, we risk creating entire generations of junk-food junkies.

With a statistic of 25% children being obese and another 25% being overweight (nearly trebled in two decades); Western nations have already swung into action. Almost 25 years ago, Norway and later Sweden were the first to ban advertising of junk food. In 2005, UK , France, Latvia (2006) banned sale of food or drinks containing artificial colouring agents, sweeteners, preservatives, amino-acids, and caffeine in schools and made it compulsory to stock healthy food, fruits, bottled water, low fat milk, low-sugar drinks, fresh juices, etc. France also made it compulsory for ads for unhealthy food, to be accompanied by health messages from 2007. In the United States, starting the next academic year, junk food will be banned in all schools and replaced with healthy alternatives. In 2012, Disney decided to ban junk food ads in its Television and Radio channels. Certain countries like the United Kingdom have banned advertisements for junk food from airing during children’s programmes.

WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE PIL IN INDIA?

The court appointed a panel of experts on the recommendation of the Health Ministry, which included representatives from the health sector, government and the Food Industry. The Food Industry representatives (from National Restaurants Association of India and the All India Food Processors Association) did not attend the first scheduled meeting on September 24th. They have exploited a loophole in the law that states that only the FSSAI (Food Safety and Standards Authority of India) has the authority to appoint committees to regulate food and beverage laws. The FSSAI has, in fact, submitted certain criteria for school foods, but these focus on general points such as hygiene rather than talk about concrete measures. Interestingly, a clever manipulation in their report seeks to separate fast-food from junk-food shifting the focus from nutrition to preparation time!

WHAT IS AT STAKE?

The AIFPA includes food giants who have millions at stake with the need to stall the process. Faced with a dwindling profit and restrictions in Western nations, logically, their next market is the Third World that now have an increasingly disposable income, rising conspicuous consumption, appallingly low health consciousness, alarmingly lax laws and relatively gullible masses. Attractive packaging, low prices and a blitz of advertising have attracted the middle class in these nations with their fascination for all things Western. It thus stands to reason that this PIL, the first strike in the battle against unhealthy eating will be faced with opposition from the parties who will lose the most. So far, the High Court has upheld its right to empanel a committee to advise it about the matter. The next hearing is in December 2013. Hopefully, this is one instance where bureaucratic and legal tangles will unravel enough to clear a path for promoting healthy eating for our future generations.