India is not the world’s healthiest country. Sadly, regulators seem determined to make the problem worse with each passing year.
Urban Indians, especially wealthier ones, have a relatively sedentary lifestyle and their diet is heavy in carbohydrates and fats. This might not show up easily in the numbers, given the size of the country’s population.
About 23 percent of Indians were technically overweight, which is defined as a body mass index (BMI) over 25, an analysis by The Lancet recently found. Many parts of the world, such as West Asia and Eastern Europe, do much worse.
However, when you break the data down, worrying trends emerge. Women over 30, for instance, have startlingly high rates of abdominal obesity in India — with a prevalence of more than 55 percent for women older than 40. That is a more dangerous indicator of predisposition to metabolic disease than regular BMI.
Moreover, genetics seem to make Indians particularly vulnerable to such ailments.
One scientist at generic pharmaceutical company Lupin Ltd said that Indians tend to have greater insulin resistance and develop type II diabetes at a younger age than the average.
The Lancet suggests that more than 100 million Indians have diabetes and 136 million are pre-diabetic. That is a crisis — one that is set to grow worse as India becomes richer and more urban.
The problem is usually blamed on a change in the diets of middle-class Indians, from fresh to processed foods. The assumption is that packaged products are unhealthier. It is right there in the name: “junk food.”
I am a tiny bit skeptical. I am addicted to Delhi’s deep-fried street food, and I am not so sure it is better for me than anything I could buy in a supermarket.
At the same time, there is data suggesting junk food in India is worse than in many other countries, with higher levels of salt, sugar and saturated fats. More importantly, packaged food can be regulated, so people at least know what they are eating. Ideally, that would allow consumers to better manage their intake of fat and salt.
There remains a lot of room for this transition in India.
Branded food makes up only one-third of the Indian market, but would expand at a compound annual growth rate above 12 percent in coming years, Nestle India Ltd said.
The question is whether regulators are up to the task. They recently announced that nutritional information about sugar, salt and saturated fat would henceforth be displayed “in bold letters and relatively increased font size on labels of packaged food items.” The news was generally welcomed.
In fact, it represented a significant climbdown. The new rules specify that this information would be estimated based on (arbitrary) serving sizes, and as a percentage of recommended daily intake. Translating this into “good” or “bad” requires a level of mental math that the average shopper likely would not want to endure.
The regulations replace a draft plan that would have imposed fewer requirements on shoppers, but was still flawed. In 2022, officials proposed a “star” rating, similar to the ones used to indicate if an appliance is energy-efficient.
As scientists said, that merely “helps the consumer choose the least unhealthy option among a host of unhealthy options.”
Critics worry that India’s food regulators respond more readily to big food companies than to doctors.
The last time they backtracked on warning labels, they placated angry consumers by telling them a new adviser would study the issue — a man whom the New York Times described as leading an institution “almost entirely funded by the Goliaths of the agribusiness, food and pharmaceutical industries.”
The processed food industry is shooting itself in the foot. If companies want Indians to make the switch from mouth-watering street food, they ought to welcome greater transparency, so consumers can be certain they are choosing healthier alternatives.
Better models are available even in India’s neighborhood. In Sri Lanka, for example, sodas are labeled with a “traffic light” system that goes from green (healthy) to red (godawful levels of sugar). Recent research has shown that the system consistently steers consumers towards healthier choices.
Indians need simple, easy-to-understand and prominent warning labels, so that their better natures are given a chance to overtake their impulses. Otherwise, their richer country would only be an unhealthier one.
Mihir Sharma is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. A senior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi, he is author of Restart: The Last Chance for the Indian Economy.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS