By Sardar Khan Niazi

Pakistan’s food environment is changing faster than its public-health policies. Children encounter sugary drinks, highly salted snacks, fried foods and heavily processed products at school gates and in neighborhood shops. The problem is that unhealthy food is increasingly cheap and easily available, while healthier choices are often less affordable. A 2025 World Bank assessment reported that 96.5 per cent of Pakistan’s population consumes foods rich in fats and sugars, while 138 million Pakistanis — 58.7pc of the population — were estimated to be unable to afford a healthy diet. The World Health Organization, meanwhile, identifies unhealthy diets, including excessive salt, sugar and unhealthy fats, as important drivers of non-communicable diseases such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer.  The response should not be a paternalistic campaign telling citizens what they must eat. Nor should the government attempt to ban every samosa, biryani or packet of crisps. Pakistan needs something more practical: a comprehensive regulatory framework that makes the food market healthier. The first priority should be mandatory, easily understandable front-of-pack nutrition labelling. Second, Pakistan should establish and enforce nationwide limits on industrially produced Trans fats. Third, children deserve special protection. Food companies should not be allowed to aggressively market products high in sugar, salt and unhealthy fats to children through schools and children’s programming. Schools themselves should become healthy food zones. The WHO’s latest guidance specifically recommends nutrition standards for food sold or served in schools, alongside measures that encourage children to choose healthier options.  Pakistan has already shown that such policies are possible. In April 2025, the Sindh Food Authority reminded Karachi’s educational institutions of restrictions on carbonated soft drinks, energy drinks and several high-fat, high-sugar and high-salt snacks. Federal and provincial authorities should therefore agree on a common minimum standard for packaged and prepared foods. Laboratories, food inspectors and regulators also need adequate resources and independence. Random testing, meaningful penalties and public disclosure of violations would be more effective than occasional raids. The government should also consider fiscal measures. A carefully designed levy on sugar-sweetened beverages, for example, can discourage excessive consumption while generating revenue for health and nutrition programs. The purpose should not be to punish consumers or raise prices indiscriminately. Revenue should be transparently directed towards preventive healthcare, school nutrition, clean drinking water and public-health education. But regulation must be accompanied by an equally serious effort to make healthy food accessible. It is easy to tell a low-income family to eat more fruit, vegetables, nuts and whole grains. It is considerably harder when a healthy basket of food costs more than calorie-dense processed alternatives. A credible food policy must therefore address agricultural supply chains, food prices, school meals and access to safe drinking water. Otherwise, “healthy eating” risks becoming advice available mainly to those who can afford it. Industry, too, has a legitimate role. Pakistan’s food manufacturers should not be treated as adversaries. Reformulation can create new markets for products containing less salt, sugar and unhealthy fat. Clear rules would also create a level playing field: responsible companies should not be undercut by competitors who reduce costs by ignoring nutritional standards. Most importantly, the government must resist the temptation to confuse awareness with policy. For years, citizens have been told to exercise more, eat less sugar and avoid junk food. Information matters, but individual choices are shaped by the environment in which those choices are made. When unhealthy products are promoted everywhere, sold cheaply and placed prominently in front of children, telling individuals to “make better choices” is an incomplete response. Pakistan needs to move from an individual-blame model to a healthy-food-environment model. The objective should not be to create a nanny state. Adults should remain free to enjoy the foods they like. The objective is to ensure that consumers know what they are buying, that dangerous ingredients are controlled, that children are not relentlessly targeted by unhealthy-food advertising, and that healthier alternatives are genuinely available and affordable. The country already knows the cost of waiting. Non-communicable diseases place a growing burden on families, hospitals and the economy. Preventing illness is almost always cheaper — and kinder — than treating it after it has taken hold. Pakistan does not need another slogan about eating healthy. It needs enforceable standards, transparent labelling, responsible marketing, stronger food authorities and political willingness to put public health ahead of commercial convenience. The choice should still belong to the consumer. But the food market should stop stacking the deck against that choice.