Aanya Zaveri, a Class 12 student at Dhirubhai Ambani International School in Mumbai, became interested in front-of-pack labelling after a trip abroad, where she saw different systems announcing the health ratings of packaged foods—something she had never seen on similar products back home.
What started as a personal curiosity developed into an independent research project examining which type of label works best for adolescents.
Quoted by many medical specialists while advocating front-of-pack labels, the teenager shows how bold warning signs on packaged foods helped teenagers make informed food choices.
Her study, published in World Nutrition Journal (a peer-reviewed journal), compared three types of front-of-pack labels — warning labels, Nutri-Score and Health Star Rating — with the conventional back-of-pack nutritional information currently available to Indian consumers.
The research focused specifically on adolescents- 120, aged 13 to 18- a group Aanya says is particularly important because teenagers are increasingly making their own food choices. Each teenager was shown biscuit packets- one a healthy one and another a maida- and sugar-laced unhealthy one. Four different formats were tested. Warning labels (Chile Style), Nutri-Score (France), Health Star rating (Australia), and no front labels (India).
The results pointed towards a clear winner.
The black, hexagonal warning labels that explicitly identify products as being “high in sugar”, “high in salt” or “high in sodium” were the easiest for the teenagers to understand and use when making decisions. Nutri-Score and Health Star Rating also performed better than conventional back-of-pack information, but neither was as effective as the warning labels.
“Around 80 percent of teenagers chose healthier biscuits when warning labels appeared on the front of the pack,” she says.
Nutri-Score was second most effective at 60 percent, and the star health rating helped 50 percent of teenagers choose the healthier option.
“We can't stop teenagers from eating unhealthy food, but we can help them make healthier choices,” she says.
For Aanya, the results emphasised just one thing- the impact of information's simplicity. Her study showed teenagers made decisions faster with warning labels. With warning labels, they took 8 seconds to decide; without labels, it took 23 seconds.
“When we're trying to make quicker choices, we use the faster system of thinking,” she says. “The front-of-pack label helps simplify that information and allows consumers to make decisions faster.”
That question resonates particularly in India, where the debate over front-of-pack labelling has continued for years. The argument is not merely about what information should appear on a packet, but how it should be presented so an ordinary consumer can understand it quickly.
Aanya says her interest lies at the intersection of biopsychology, public health and policy — areas she hopes to explore further. She also likes history. The Mumbai teenager says she did the project outside her schoolwork because she felt very strongly about it.
Her project also reflects a larger shift in the conversation around children's health. Instead of asking only how to stop teenagers from consuming unhealthy foods, it asks whether the environment in which they make those choices can be changed to make healthier decisions easier.
For a school student, it is an unusually policy-oriented question.
And perhaps that is what makes Aanya's research interesting: she is not arguing that labels will solve India's nutrition problem. She asks whether a few seconds of clearer information could change how the next generation chooses what to eat.
Many experts promoting front-of-pack labels in India have shared and amplified Aanya’s work.