India must improve food safety through science and trust

Source: The post India must improve food safety through science and trust has been created, based on the article “Maintaining India’s progress in food safety standards” published in “The Hindu” on 7 June 2025. India must improve food safety through science and trust.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper3-issues of buffer stocks and food security

Context: India’s food safety journey has evolved from a narrow focus on adulteration to a more science-based framework led by FSSAI. However, gaps in research, communication, and legacy regulations remain. World Food Safety Day 2024 highlights the urgency to refine India’s systems using science and public trust.

For detailed information on Food Safety Regulations in India read this article here

From Adulteration to Risk-Based Regulation

1. Initial Legal Framework: The Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Act, 1954, saw food safety in black-and-white terms—adulterated or not. It treated all contaminants the same, without assessing quantity or consumption levels.
2. Shift to Scientific Standards: The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, marked a turning point. FSSAI was created, adopting a risk-based approach inspired by the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
3. Standard Setting and Alignment: By 2020, India’s food safety standards had largely matched those of advanced nations. FSSAI defined maximum residue limits (MRLs), additive levels, and drug residue norms.

Challenges in Risk Assessment

1. Lack of India-Specific Research: Most safety norms are based on global data, ignoring Indian dietary patterns, farming methods, or environmental factors. There’s no India-specific Total Diet Study (TDS), weakening exposure assessment.
2. Fragmented Data Systems: Without a TDS, India relies on scattered data, which affects the accuracy and credibility of risk evaluations for food contaminants.
3. Public Misunderstanding of Technical Terms: Complex terms like MRLs and ADIs in ppm or ppb confuse the public. Revised safety thresholds often trigger unfounded concerns about reduced safety.

Legacy Regulations and Consumer Misconceptions

1. Case of MSG Misregulation: MSG, declared safe by JECFA since 1971, still carries an outdated warning in India despite its acceptance globally and its natural presence in common foods.
2. Public Fear from Misleading Labels: The mandatory warning creates a false impression of MSG as dangerous, though glutamates are naturally present even in breast milk, tomatoes, and mushrooms.
3. Contradiction with Global Science: India’s continued use of obsolete warnings shows reluctance to update laws based on new scientific evidence.

Strengthening Scientific Foundation

1. Investing in Local Research: India must conduct local toxicological studies and a full TDS to understand total food-based exposure to chemicals and residues.
2. Improving Risk Communication: Scientific messages should be simplified for the public. Misleading or outdated labels like those on MSG must be revised.
3. Capacity Building and Transparency: Risk assessors need continuous training. Updating standards based on new research and maintaining openness is key.
4. Building Public Trust: Consistent dialogue with consumers, industry, and other stakeholders will enhance confidence and promote informed choices.

Conclusion

India’s progress in food safety is commendable but incomplete. Scientific evidence, not fear or outdated norms, must guide regulations. Clear communication and public engagement will ensure food safety rooted in trust and modern science.

Question for practice:

Discuss how India’s food safety system has evolved and what challenges remain in aligning it with scientific standards.