In a significant setback for fitness drink brands, the central government has instructed all e-commerce platforms to remove various drinks and beverages, including the popular milk supplement Bournvita, from the ‘healthy drinks’ category.
The order comes a month after the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) wrote to the commerce ministry, advising it to request all e-commerce companies to remove drinks and beverages from the ‘health drinks’ category on their websites. The commission had also forwarded a copy of the letter to the ministries of health and electronics and information technology (MeiTY) for action.
What did the Centre state in its advisory?
In a letter dated April 10, the Ministry of Commerce advised e-commerce companies to exclude Bournvita and other beverages from the ‘health drinks’ category following an inquiry conducted by the NCPCR, which determined that there is no definition of a health drink under the Food Safety and Standards (FSS) Act 2006.
“National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), a statutory body constituted under Section (3) of the Commission of Protection of Child Rights (CPCR) Act, 2005 after its inquiry under Section 14 of CRPC Act 2005 concluded that there is no ‘health drink’ defined under FSS Act 2006, rules and regulations submitted by FSSAI and Mondelez India Food Pvt Ltd,” the ministry stated in its notification.
When and how did the controversy start?
In April of last year, nutritionist and influencer Revant Himatsingka shared a video on his Instagram account criticising Bournvita, owned by confectionery maker Mondelez, for its high sugar content. The video garnered over 12 million views and was widely shared across social media platforms and WhatsApp.
In the video, while taking a swipe at Bournvita’s tagline “Tayyari Jeet Ki” (preparing for victory), Himatsingka suggested that Bournvita was actually preparing children for diabetes. Additionally, he listed all the ingredients in the children’s drink, debunked claims of its healthiness, and pointed out that half of a package of Bournvita is sugar, and it even contains ingredients that could cause cancer.
Legal Notice Against Himatsingka
After the video went viral and drew criticism toward the popular brand, trouble arose when Mondelez India sent Himatsingka a legal notice, demanding the removal of the video within 24 hours.
Himatsingka, who removed the video after receiving the legal notice, issued a statement expressing that he had no intention or resources to engage in legal battles with Mondelez, who also owns Cadbury.
“I apologize to Cadbury for making the video. I did not plan or intend to infringe any trademark or defame any company nor do I have the interest or resources to participate in any court cases and I request MNCs to not take this forward legally,” he stated.
In the same month, Mondelez India refuted the claims made by the social media influencer regarding its high sugar content. They called his assertions as “unscientific” and accused him of “distorting facts and making false and negative implications.”
Mondelez, in an official statement, stated that the drink contains nutrients such as Vitamin A, C, D, iron, zinc, and copper, which aid in building immunity and have been part of its formulation for 70 years.
“Every serving of 20 grams of Bournvita contains 7.5 grams of added sugar, which is approximately one and a half teaspoons. This is much less than the daily recommended intake limits of sugar for children… All ingredients are safe, approved for use, and within permissible limits as per regulatory guidelines,” the company’s statement clarified.
Following this, the NCPCR had issued a notice to Mondelez in April last year, urging the company to reassess and withdraw all misleading advertisements, packaging, and labels. The NCPCR is a statutory body established under Section 3 of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, tasked with safeguarding child rights and related matters in the country.
In a letter addressed to Mondelez International India President Deepak Iyer, the commission had stated, “The commission in this regard observes that the product manufactured by your company is misleading the customers through its product packaging and advertisements. The commission observes that your product’s labelling, packaging, display and advertisement claims are misleading for the general public.”
Comments
0 comment