Need to regulate unhealthy foods

The WHO has warned that some of the world's largest ultra-processed food companies are using litigation to challenge government efforts to regulate unhealthy foods in the interest of public health. A recent investigation by The Guardian found 235 lawsuits filed by ultra-processed food companies over the last fifteen years in the UK, the US and several South American countries. Even where governments ultimately prevailed, litigation often delays implementation of needed regulatory efforts.

Pakistan should view these developments as more than a distant international debate given their implications for the country's own public-health challenges. Diabetes, obesity, hypertension and cardiovascular disease impose a substantial burden on Pakistan's public health system. Growing consumption of sugary drinks and ultra-processed foods is contributing to worsening rates of these preventable diseases.

The parallels between tobacco and ultra-processed foods are difficult to ignore. For decades, tobacco companies denied or downplayed the health risks of smoking. They warned that regulation of tobacco would damage the economy, and they lobbied politicians to impede public health measures. Such tactics significantly delayed regulatory action despite overwhelming scientific evidence linking tobacco use to disease and premature death.

Today, public health experts see some similar patterns emerging in debates over unhealthy foods and sugary beverages. This comparison does not imply that tobacco and food are equivalent products. Instead, it aims to point to the pushback exerted on governments by big business when its commercial interest conflicts with public health objectives.

For several years, successive federal budgets in Pakistan have been preceded by debates over taxing sugar-sweetened beverages and processed foods. Industry groups have argued that higher taxes would hurt consumers, threaten jobs and discourage investment. Conversely, medical associations and nutrition experts have increasingly been demanding higher federal excise duties on sugar-sweetened beverages which could in turn be used to strengthen nutrition programmes and make healthier foods more affordable.

The government stopped short of adopting those recommendations in its latest Finance Bill. Instead, the 2026-27 bill expanded the sales-tax regime for a range of retail-packed products, including sugar confectionery, pasta, noodles, sauces, jams and condiments. At the same time, it withdrew a proposed 20% federal excise duty on mineral water, aerated water and electrolyte drinks. These measures reflect an attempt to balance competing public health and industry groups interests.

The aim should not be to punish the food industry, which provides employment and contributes to economic growth. But governments have a responsibility to protect public health when substantial scientific evidence links excessive consumption of sugar-rich and ultra-processed foods to preventable disease.

Pakistan's experience with tobacco control illustrates that regulation can change behaviour. Tobacco consumption fell by over 15% between 2014 and 2024, according to the latest Global Adult Tobacco Survey, after the introduction of tobacco taxation, larger pictorial health warnings and restrictions on tobacco marketing and sales.

The same principle should now guide food policy. Front-of-pack nutrition warning labels, restrictions on marketing unhealthy foods to children, healthier school-food standards and well-designed taxes are not radical interventions. They are evidence-based measures that have already been adopted in various forms in countries around the world to reduce preventable illness.

Pakistani policymakers should learn from the experience of tobacco regulation and act before commercial and legal pressures make it difficult to implement food policy reforms. Protecting public health should not mean choosing between economic growth and cumbersome regulations. It means ensuring that economic activity does not come at the expense of the health of our population.