AgenciesAmul’s recent launch of what it claimed to be “India’s first liquid infant formula” has triggered sharp criticism from public health activists, who have accused the dairy giant of violating the Infant Milk Substitutes (IMS) Act.
The activists have filed a formal complaint with key government bodies, including the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Health, FSSAI, and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights.
The IMS Act strictly prohibits the promotion of breastmilk substitutes for children under the age of two. Activists argue that the manner in which Amul’s new product was launched and reported in the media amounts to a clear case of promotion — which is banned under Section 3(c) of the law.
The coverage of the product highlighted its convenience, calling it “ideal to carry” and “good for working mothers”. Activists contend that this framing “directly positions the product as a substitute for breastfeeding and this action as promotion.”
They also pointed out that Amul’s use of a teddy bear graphic on the label may be in breach of IMS Act provisions that ban “pictures or other graphic material or phrases designed to increase the saleability of infant milk substitute or infant food.”
In response, Amul issued a clarification on social media, saying: “Amulspray is one of India’s oldest and most trusted infant milk food brands and is in complete compliance of the IMS Act…”
However, public health advocates remain unconvinced.
“Amul’s actions constitute a clear case of promotion of an infant milk substitute — an act explicitly prohibited under Section 3(c) of the IMS Act,” they maintained.
The complainants have called for an official enquiry into the launch and marketing of the product, the removal of the teddy bear graphic from the packaging, issuance of media guidelines for IMS-compliant reporting, and strict enforcement of the Act.
(With inputs from ToI)
The activists have filed a formal complaint with key government bodies, including the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Health, FSSAI, and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights.
The IMS Act strictly prohibits the promotion of breastmilk substitutes for children under the age of two. Activists argue that the manner in which Amul’s new product was launched and reported in the media amounts to a clear case of promotion — which is banned under Section 3(c) of the law.
The coverage of the product highlighted its convenience, calling it “ideal to carry” and “good for working mothers”. Activists contend that this framing “directly positions the product as a substitute for breastfeeding and this action as promotion.”
They also pointed out that Amul’s use of a teddy bear graphic on the label may be in breach of IMS Act provisions that ban “pictures or other graphic material or phrases designed to increase the saleability of infant milk substitute or infant food.”
In response, Amul issued a clarification on social media, saying: “Amulspray is one of India’s oldest and most trusted infant milk food brands and is in complete compliance of the IMS Act…”
However, public health advocates remain unconvinced.
“Amul’s actions constitute a clear case of promotion of an infant milk substitute — an act explicitly prohibited under Section 3(c) of the IMS Act,” they maintained.
The complainants have called for an official enquiry into the launch and marketing of the product, the removal of the teddy bear graphic from the packaging, issuance of media guidelines for IMS-compliant reporting, and strict enforcement of the Act.
(With inputs from ToI)
(Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.)
Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online.
Read More News on
(Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.)
Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online.
ETPrime Membership
