Regulating the composition of infant nutrition products is a preventive public-health measure. Discuss with reference to FSSAI's recent proposals on added sugars.

On 16 October 2026, FSSAI published a draft amendment. It proposes that sucrose and fructose "shall not be added" to products for infants up to six months [1]. This is a preventive step, though its reach is narrow.

Why composition rules are preventive

• Critical window: The first six months shape lifelong growth and metabolism. Removing added sugar tackles a childhood-obesity risk factor before disease appears [1].
• Closer to breast milk: Lactose and glucose polymers stay as the preferred carbohydrates. The 2020 Regulations allowed sucrose and fructose "when required"; the draft makes that a flat ban [1].
• Protects formula-fed infants: Only about 47% of infants under six months worldwide are exclusively breastfed [2]. Babies of working or ill mothers depend on safe substitutes.
• Governance tool: The rule is delegated legislation under the FSS Act, 2006, with a 60-day public consultation [1][3]. It adds to the bold total-sugar labelling approved at the 44th Food Authority meeting [4].

Limitations

• Narrow scope: Most added sugar is in complementary foods for older babies. A WHO/Europe study found 24% of baby foods had added sugar or sweeteners [5]. Yet the draft leaves foods for 6–24 months untouched.
• Substitution loophole: Banning only two named sugars lets fruit purée or concentrate sweeten products labelled "no added sugar" [6].
• Marketing outweighs recipe: More than half of the women surveyed in eight countries had been exposed to formula marketing [7]. India's IMS Act, 1992 relies on complaints from notified voluntary bodies [8]. In 2020, MoHFW had to issue an advisory urging prosecutions [9].
• Special medical needs: The draft does not say whether specialised formulas are exempt [1].

Way forward

• Extend sugar limits to 6–24 months, as WHO/Europe's Nutrient and Promotion Profile Model recommends for commercial baby foods [6].
• Cap total sugar, not just named sugars.
• Survey products on Indian shelves before setting wider norms, as WHO/Europe did [5].
• Enforce the IMS Act on the government's own initiative, in line with the National IYCF Guidelines [10].

Regulating composition moves infant health policy from cure to prevention. Its gains depend on wider coverage and firm control of marketing. A final rule with a total-sugar cap across 0–24 months, backed by active IMS Act enforcement, would serve Article 47's duty to improve nutrition and public health, and SDG targets 2.2 and 3.4.