Complaint filed against Amul for ‘promoting' its newly launched ‘Infant Formula', violates ‘IMS Act' says BPNI
Dr. Arun Gupta, MD, FIAP (Ped), coordinator at BPNI took to X to flag it, stating, 'BPNI makes a formal complaint to concerned authorities requesting for actions to protect children's health @MoHFW_INDIA @fssaiindia @NCPCR_ @MinistryWCD. Violations of IMS Act undermine breastfeeding. This time its @Amul_Coop.' He further questioned, 'Why it is so difficult to abide by the law?'
In a complaint to Ministry of Health, Ministry of Women and Child Development, FSSAI, NCPCR, for a quicker action and compliance, the BPNI stated, 'The promotion of infant formula by @Amul_Coop, as reported is in direct contravention of Section 9 of the IMS Act, 1992, which prohibits all forms of advertising and promotion of infant milk substitutes. The use of a teddy bear image further violates Section 6(2) of the Act.' The first page of the complaint filed by BPNI (Image: @moveribfan/X)
It cited Section 2(g) of the IMS Act which defines "infant milk substitute" as any food marketed or represented as a replacement for mother's milk for infants up to two years of age, Section 2(i) that defines promotion as encouraging any person to purchase or use an infant milk substitute and Section 6 prohibiting the use of graphics or phrases that enhance the saleability of infant milk substitutes.
It further alleges that Amul issued a press release about its 'India's first liquid ready-to-feed infant formula', promoting it as 'ideal to carry' and 'good for working mothers,' which BPNI claims is promotional in nature, adding Amul allegedly used a teddy bear image in its product label, which BPNI says is not a neutral symbol and is used to emotionally appeal and increase saleability, violating Section 6(2) of the Act. The second page of the complaint filed by BPNI. (Image: @moveribfan/X)
Calling for a 'thorough investigation' into the alleged violation and "cognisable offence", the BPNI has asked to cease all promotional activities related to infant milk substitutes, withdraw the teddy bear graphic from the label, set up a monitoring mechanism for IMS Act compliance and advise media outlets to vet press releases for legal compliance before publication.
'Amulspray is one of India's oldest and most trusted infant milk food brands and is in complete compliance of the IMS Act. The link mentioned by you in your post is not active. We remain committed to all the guidelines of BPNI regarding promotion of infant food in India,' Amul's customer care stated on X.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
9 hours ago
- India Today
No healthcare, allied courses to be offered online from July 2025
The University Grants Commission (UGC) has issued a directive to higher education institutions (HEIs) to discontinue offering healthcare and allied programmes under the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions (NCAHP) Act, 2021, through Open and Distance Learning (ODL) or online mode. The ban will take effect from the 2025-26 academic session, starting BANS ONLINE AND ODL HEALTHCARE PROGRAMMES FROM 2025-26The decision follows recommendations from the 24th Distance Education Bureau Working Group meeting held in April 2025 and was formalised during the UGC's 592nd meeting on July 23, ban targets specialisations such as Psychology, Microbiology, Food and Nutrition Science, Biotechnology, Clinical Nutrition, and Dietetics. Institutions that already received recognition to offer these programmes in online or ODL mode will have it have also been instructed not to admit any new students into these courses from the 2025-26 session onwards. In multi-specialisation degrees, only healthcare-related components will be example, a Bachelor of Arts programme with multiple majors including Psychology will see only the Psychology stream removed from ODL or online OVERSIGHT ON FOREIGN COLLABORATIONS AND UNRECOGNISED COURSESThe UGC's directive comes amid growing concern over unrecognised collaborations with foreign educational higher education regulator has reiterated that degrees or diplomas awarded through such unapproved arrangements will be invalid in entering into partnerships without explicit UGC approval under the 2022 and 2023 joint and dual-degree frameworks will have their programmes deemed notice builds on an earlier advisory from December 12, 2023, which warned HEIs against unauthorised tie-ups with foreign repeated guidance, several colleges and EdTech platforms continued offering online or joint programmes with foreign partners lacking UGC and academic experts say the move is aimed at safeguarding students from enrolling in courses that may not be valid for employment or further decision also reinforces the UGC's oversight of the growing online education sector, particularly in healthcare and allied disciplines where professional recognition is pulling online healthcare programmes from ODL delivery, the UGC is signalling stricter compliance requirements for HEIs and foreign collaborations. Students and institutions alike are being urged to align with the regulations to avoid invalid degrees and potential legal complications.- Ends
NDTV
a day ago
- NDTV
Universities Directed Not To Offer Healthcare, Allied Courses In Online Mode
The University Grants Commission (UGC) has directed all Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to stop offering allied and healthcare programmes covered under the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions (NCAHP) Act, 2021, including Psychology as a specialisation, through Open and Distance Learning (ODL) or online mode from the July-August 2025 academic session. According to the directive, any recognition already granted to HEIs for running such programmes in the July-August 2025 session or later will be withdrawn. In cases where programmes have multiple specialisations - such as Bachelor of Arts courses in subjects including English, Hindi, Economics, Political Science, Sociology, and others - only the specialisations covered under the NCAHP Act, 2021, will be discontinued. The UGC has instructed that no new admissions be made to the affected programmes from the upcoming session. All stakeholders have been urged to take note of and adhere to the decision.
The Hindu
2 days ago
- The Hindu
Should HIV/AIDS testing be made mandatory before marriage?
In July, Meghalaya Health and Family Welfare Minister Mazel Ampareen Lyngdoh announced that the State may follow Goa in making HIV/AIDS test mandatory for all before marriage. The problem is multi-disciplinary; it is not merely a question of health, but also involves considerations of human rights, stigma, and free will. Should HIV/AIDS testing be made mandatory? N. Kumarasamy and Jahnabi Goswami discuss the question in a conversation moderated by Ramya Kannan. Edited excerpts: Is it possible to implement mandatory testing for HIV before marriage? What are the advantages of such a move? N. Kumarasamy: Regarding HIV, making anything mandatory is not acceptable. The HIV and AIDS (Prevention and Control) Act, 2017, clearly mandates counselling before testing, and testing only with the consent of a patient. As per the law of the land, once you do the testing, everything must be kept confidential. If they test positive, patients should be linked to the appropriate antiretroviral treatment centres. The next question will be whether they can get married — that has also been dealt with by the 2017 law. Today, based on science, we know that if a HIV-positive person is put on antiretroviral treatment, the viral load goes to an undetectable level within 2-3 months. Studies have shown that a person who has an undetectable level of viral load will not transmit infections sexually to their partners. The person will also not develop any HIV-related complications such as opportunistic infections, tuberculosis (TB), and various other comorbid conditions, and maintain a normal immunity level. Mandatory HIV testing without the consent of such a person will be a human rights violation. And doing so will also increase stigma. For all these reasons, mandatory testing cannot take place. HIV testing should be offered to as many people as possible — mainly to those who are at risk and also people who believe that they may be at risk. It should be offered. Consent is important. And testing, if done, should be done while maintaining appropriate confidentiality. Jahnabi Goswami: Yes, the viral load can be managed with drugs. But I still think HIV testing should be made mandatory before marriage. There are a number of cases we know where people who have been infected, but are not taking antiretrovirals regularly, get married because of family and societal pressure. The spouse finds out only later, or perhaps when she or he tests positive for HIV. The children are likely to be affected too. In India we believe in matching horoscopes before the wedding. Why not a HIV test, to see if the couple are compatible at all? Such a test will also ensure the health of the family. Will this move actually empower women? Jahnabi Goswami: My agenda is not women or male empowerment per se. In the north-east, specifically, there have been a number of cases where the (HIV positive) status was concealed. Injecting drug use is responsible for nearly 64% of HIV infections in the north-east. Men (injecting drug users) clean up for three months, get married and don't inform their wives. A few months later, they bring their wives too to test. Even today, we had such a case. This happens regularly. In fact, I believe that to safeguard women and girls, it is essential to go in for mandatory testing, with counselling. About confidentiality and consent, I want to point out that in practice, doctors are forcefully testing for HIV. Even if you go for a small dental procedure — sometimes they counsel, sometimes they don't, and force you to do HIV test. Sometimes it is good counselling and sometimes it is of bad quality. Will the HIV test, if it comes negative, provide a false sense of security? N. Kumarasamy: While you are doing appropriate testing, you are also counselling a patient to find out the duration of exposure. That also helps you determine the window period when testing should be offered. That is the reason you counsel someone. If you force someone to do a test, they may go to a lab and get it done. The test report can be negative but the person might really be positive (for HIV) leading to transmission of infection. If testing is done with appropriate consent, counselling, and confidentiality, I'm sure people are not going to refuse it. Goa also proposed mandatory testing some years ago, but it is still not a reality... N. Kumarasamy: Yes, it is not implemented in Goa. But there is wide testing happening in the State. There is no mandatory testing before a wedding. The thing is they cannot implement this because this will cause human rights violations. The same thing is happening in Meghalaya. If you look at the reports on rising infections, perhaps the State is ranked 5th or 6th where a significant number of infections is through injecting drug use and also through sexual contact. But I think it is possible to learn from other States, especially from southern India — Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Andhra Pradesh — as well as Maharashtra. The ideal way to contain this infection is to do appropriate HIV testing as much as possible in a variety of settings with proper consent and then link those tested people to the treatment. That will reduce infectiousness in the country and also lead to a reduction in new infections in Meghalaya. Jahnabi Goswami: I think it will definitely happen because the situation is quite different in Meghalaya. To understand it, you should understand the circumstances and people of the State. In Meghalaya, certain groups in the Christian community still think it is taboo to use a condom even if it is recommended by law. (The HIV Act promotes safe sex practices.) In fact, implementing the HIV/AIDS Act in Meghalaya is really difficult. Also, culturally and socially, they have provisions for extramarital affairs and living together. These are quite common among the youth. Simultaneously, HIV is a big discriminator in Meghalaya and no one has actually accepts HIV-positive men or women. How do we address the stigma that is still associated with HIV? N. Kumarasamy: Stigma started in India because it (HIV) was first detected in a commercial sex worker, so it was attributed to multi-partner sex. But this is not true, as we have seen. HIV is still an incurable disease. The way to address stigma today is to make sure that common people are aware that we now have treatment available. Even if it is not curable, it is permanently controllable. In our research studies in Chennai, we showed that treating one partner will prevent transmission if the viral load goes down. The message U=U (undetectable is untransmittable) does work. Such scientific messages can remove stigma from the community, so that as many people as possible will test and be linked to treatment. Someone who is already on treatment will do well, and not transmit infection to the others. Addressing stigma is not an easy thing. Over 30 years of taking care of people with HIV and their families at our centre here, we realise that each one is different. Much is based on their education, how they were raised, and whether they live in the village or city. All this will have to be wrapped up in several rounds of counselling. Jahnabi Goswami: As Dr. Kumarasamy has said, stigma is associated not with the disease, but with where the infection arises from. The impression is that people who are in sex work will get HIV; people who do drugs will get HIV. That is where the stigma comes from. We should constantly try to reduce stigma. The government, people who are infected, like me, and those working in the field should work hard to erode the stigma. If someone has cancer, they say without any hesitation that their family members died of cancer. If they are diabetic, they say they don't use sugar. And if they have hypertension, they don't mind asking you not to put salt in their food. But people who have HIV or people who have TB do not talk openly about it because these are seen as behavioral issues. We must remove the stigma and make it comfortable for HIV-positive people to talk about their status. I do believe we have to involve counsellors to tell people that they will not transmit because they are on treatment, that U=U; and involve more people with HIV as role models to reduce stigma and discrimination. The quality of counselling should be improved for sure. Listen to the conversation
