And why the ongoing debate about food ingredients is good for the consumer.
Let me give you an insider’s secret.
Most FMCG companies tend to prioritize avoiding regulatory trouble over genuinely fulfilling their promises to consumers.
Here’s a telling example.
The Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) recently upheld a complaint against Honasa Consumer Pvt Ltd, the parent company of Mama Earth. The issue was that the claims about a certain lip mask (Aqualogica Glow + Plump Lip Mask) were misleading. Upon evaluating the data provided by the company, ASCI found that Honasa did not have enough evidence to back their claims.
Why was the complaint upheld? Honasa couldn’t prove that their lip balm reduced pigmentation on lips as claimed on their website. They had no clinical data and based their claim on the properties of an ‘active’ ingredient in their formula, which they didn’t add in effective levels.
Here’s where it gets interesting.
I checked the website, and it says the product lightens dark and pigmented lips, with a disclaimer that the claim is based on the properties of the key ingredient.
So, the company is being honest, right? Not quite.
Most consumers don’t understand what this means.
The company is essentially saying they found an ingredient known for reducing pigmentation on skin—a vitamin C derivative from a specific supplier. They then added this to their formula in very small amounts (since adding it at effective levels would cut into their profits) and marketed it without clinical data.
This is what they are not telling you. But of course, one cannot argue that they are not being honest. They have mentioned, very clearly, that the claim is based on the ingredient and not the formula.
That’s honest, yes. But the wrong kind of honest. The disclaimer will keep them out of trouble with the regulators. But they are still not being fully clear and one can argue that they are misleading the consumer.
Unfortunately, this is very common in the skin care and cosmetics space. Expensive ingredients are printed in bold, big letters on pack, misleading consumers into believing the product is highly effective while the truth maybe far from it.
Another example: Most skincare and cosmetic products contain fragrances. A fragrance can have between twenty to up to two hundred individual ingredients, several of which can be allergens. Many products, especially from international brands selling within the EU, list these allergens because it’s mandatory under EU law. However, Indian regulations don’t require this, so several brands simply list “fragrance” without mentioning the allergens.
Again, they are within the law not to list known allergens. But for the consumer, this could mean a serious problem. Even if one consumer avoids a severe reaction by knowing the allergens, it’s worth the effort.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, right?
Does this mean everyone is doing wrong? No. But such practices are widespread. Even big brands do it. Can consumers do something about this? Yes.
It starts with awareness.
Brands often choose this path because there are no significant consequences (yes, ASCI may ask them to take down an ad, but it rarely causes real damage) and because it’s standard industry practice.
Puffery is accepted. Hiding behind complicated ingredient listings is accepted.
This is why the ongoing discussions about ingredients in packaged food products in the country are so important. Many may dismiss them as fearmongering, and industry experts may defend their actions as legal under current regulations. But it reveals how the industry can significantly impact consumers’ health.
A healthy marketplace offers consumers the right to choose the product they want based on accurate information. Misleading or missing information that tricks consumers into choosing an unhealthy product amount to cheating.
Movements demanding greater transparency and honesty from FMCG companies benefit the marketplace. These movements level the playing field for big and small companies alike. Regulators also take cues from such movements by tightening rules.
Pursuing transparency and honesty in the FMCG sector is not just a regulatory necessity but a moral imperative.
Here is the link to the ASCI complaint – Complaint Outcomes Details – ASCI (ascionline.in)
And there is the link to the Aqualogica lip mask – Glow+ Plump Lip Mask 15g – Aqualogica
V S Koushik 