If FSSAI's warning labels started today
FSSAI wants red warnings on packaged food high in added sugar, added fat or salt. It first proposed a warning only when 2 were high. After the Supreme Court asked why, it said on 23 September that 1 is enough. I ran both on Indian labels.
Quick answers
How many Indian packaged foods would get FSSAI's proposed warning?
71% of the 665 foods I tested. That is under FSSAI's current plan, where a food high in any one of added sugar, added fat or salt gets the warning. Under its first plan, which needed 2 or more, it would have been 41%.
What did the switch to a single nutrient change?
It added about 30 in every 100 packaged foods: the ones high in just one thing. Soft drinks are the clearest case: 69% are high in added sugar, but only 3% would have been warned under the 2-nutrient plan, because sugar is their only high nutrient.
Which foods change most between the two plans?
Foods that are high in just one thing. Soft drinks go from 3% to 69%. Yoghurt and curd go from 3% to 38%. Biscuits and chips barely change, because most are already high in two things.
Which nutrient is high most often?
Added sugar, in 45% of foods. Added fat is high in 43% and salt in 33%.
What limits does FSSAI propose?
FSSAI told the Supreme Court it would use the ICMR-NIN 2024 limits. For a solid food, per 100 g: 3 g added sugar, 4.2 g added fat, 625 mg salt. For a drink, per 100 ml: 2 g, 1.5 g and 175 mg.
Old plan against current plan, by category
| Category | Foods tested | Dropped plan (2+ high) | Current plan (any 1 high) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biscuits and cookies | 55 | 93% | 98% |
| Chocolate and confectionery | 48 | 79% | 96% |
| Chips and crisps | 34 | 91% | 94% |
| Sauces, ketchup and spreads | 67 | 33% | 76% |
| Soft drinks and energy drinks | 32 | 3% | 69% |
| Breakfast cereals and muesli | 41 | 32% | 61% |
| Yoghurt and curd | 90 | 3% | 38% |
| Flours, grains and pulses | 32 | 16% | 22% |
Each nutrient
| Warning | Share of foods |
|---|---|
| High in added sugar | 44.8% |
| High in added fat | 42.9% |
| High in salt | 32.8% |
The rules I used
The limits FSSAI cited to the Supreme Court in its 28 August 2026 affidavit, from Table 15.1 of the ICMR-NIN Dietary Guidelines for Indians, 2024 (LiveLaw, Business Standard). A solid food is high at 3 g of added sugar, 4.2 g of added fat or 625 mg of salt in 100 g. A drink is high at 2 g, 1.5 g or 175 mg in 100 ml.
Added sugar is the number the label itself declares; Indian labels must print it, and 682 of the foods had it. Where it was missing, I used total sugar, but only if a sugar was in the ingredient list. Added fat is total fat when an oil or fat is in the list. Salt counts when salt is in the list. Oils, ghee, flours, spices and tea are left out, as FSSAI exempts single-ingredient and naturally fat-rich foods.
What this can't tell you
- The final rule is not out. FSSAI told the court it needs about 4 months to finalise it, then gives companies a year (ThePrint). The court reserved its order on 28 September 2026, and the limits may change.
- FSSAI also plans to cover some sweetened drinks by type, whatever their numbers. This study uses the nutrient limits only.
- Labels show total fat, not added fat, so the fat numbers are an upper estimate.
- The data is from Open Food Facts, filled in by volunteers. Only 665 Indian foods had every number needed, so treat category numbers as rough.
- It covers categories, not brands, and rates no product.
Data and code: https://github.com/devnarsinghani22/india-label-index (fssai.py). See also If India used Chile's warning labels. Part of the India Label Index 2026.
Narsinghani, D. (2026). If FSSAI's warning labels started today. India Label Index 2026. https://devnarsinghani22.github.io/india-label-index/fssai-warning-labels/. Data from Open Food Facts (ODbL).