FSSAI Questions Nestle, Zydus Product Claims

Summary: FSSAI has issued notices seeking evidence for claims on Nestle India’s Lactogen Pro 1 and NAN Excella Pro Stage 1, and Zydus Wellness’s Complan. The regulator also flagged an Instagram reel promoting infant milk substitutes and named Abbott Healthcare and others. The notices request explanations and scientific substantiation; they are regulatory steps, not findings that the products are unsafe or that the companies have violated the law.

India’s food regulator has widened its scrutiny of claims made for infant and children’s nutrition products. The immediate issue is whether the wording on labels, e-commerce listings and social media is backed by evidence and complies with food-claim and infant-nutrition rules—not a product recall or a final safety finding.

What Happened

On October 21, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India said it had issued notices concerning Complan, Lactogen Pro 1 Powder, NAN Excella Pro Stage 1 and infant milk substitutes.

For Nestle India, FSSAI sought scientific support for an “easy to digest” whey-protein claim on Lactogen Pro 1 and an immune-system claim linked to “5 HMOs” on NAN Excella Pro Stage 1. For Zydus Wellness, it sought justification for Complan claims relating to faster growth, concentration, memory and immunity.

The regulator also cited an Instagram reel promoting infant milk substitutes and named an influencer as well as Nestle India, Abbott Healthcare, Nutricia International and Mead Johnson Nutrition India. This was a separate promotional-compliance issue from the product-claim notices.

Why It Matters

Health and growth claims can influence parents’ purchasing decisions, especially in categories where consumers may treat advertising language as medical or nutritional guidance. A requirement to substantiate such claims can affect label design, digital campaigns, influencer partnerships and e-commerce listings across the packaged-food industry.

Market Impact

No company-specific share-price effect can be cleanly attributed to the notices from the evidence available at publication. The more immediate business risk is compliance-related: companies may need to defend their evidence, change claims or alter campaigns. Any financial impact will depend on the regulator’s final action and the companies’ responses.

Industry Context

Reuters reported that Nestle India said the latest post reiterated issues raised on September 18 and that it had already submitted a detailed response. Abbott said it was not involved in or aware of the cited social-media content, did not endorse it and had informed FSSAI of that position. Zydus Wellness had not immediately responded to Reuters outside business hours.

FSSAI has been increasing scrutiny of advertising and labelling claims. A related BusinessNews1 report covered the Delhi High Court’s Red Bull “energy drink” label ruling, illustrating how product descriptions can become significant regulatory and legal issues even when the underlying products remain on sale.

What To Watch Next

The next material events are written responses from Nestle India and Zydus Wellness, any further clarification from Abbott or the other companies named in the promotional notice, and a final FSSAI order. Watch for label or advertisement changes, takedowns of social-media content and any formal enforcement action.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do the notices mean the products are unsafe?

No. The notices concern advertising, labelling and the evidence supporting specific health or growth claims. They ask companies to explain their position and provide documents. A notice does not establish that a product is unsafe, that a claim is false, or that a legal violation has been proved.

Which claims did FSSAI question?

FSSAI sought evidence for digestion and immune-system claims on Lactogen Pro 1 and NAN Excella Pro Stage 1. For Complan, it questioned growth, concentration, memory and immunity-related claims, including “2X Faster Growth.” The regulator also raised a separate issue involving online promotion of infant milk substitutes.

How have the companies responded?

Nestle India said the latest FSSAI post reiterated issues raised on September 18 and that it had already submitted a detailed response. Abbott said it was not involved in or aware of the social-media content cited in the notice, did not endorse it, and had conveyed that position to the regulator.