It is past midnight. A phone lights up, a thumb scrolls, and within seconds an order is placed—chips, a soft drink, perhaps something sweet. Ten minutes later, the doorbell rings. In a quarter of an hour, three metabolic crimes are committed with surgical efficiency: sleep is delayed, fatigue is ignored, and ultra-processed food is consumed at the worst possible hour for the body. This is no longer an occasional lapse in self-control; it is a structurally enabled behaviour. Across urban India, quick commerce has built an ecosystem where unhealthy choice is the default choice, and convenience has quietly replaced intention in how food enters daily life.

Evidence now confirms what intuition has long suspected. A recent nationwide analysis   shows that nearly half of all packaged food items listed on quick-commerce and online grocery platforms fall into the junk, ultra-processed, or HFSS (high fat, sugar, salt) category. On some platforms, this figure climbs to 62 per cent; even the “healthier” ones hover around 47–48 per cent. This skew is not accidental. These platforms are designed around discretionary, impulse-driven consumption—ice cream at 9 pm, noodles at midnight, chips because they are one tap away. When speed meets craving, nutritional value becomes collateral damage. The architecture of these apps rewards immediacy, not mindfulness.

More disturbing is who is consuming this food and how frequently. Parents in Delhi NCR, Mumbai, Bengaluru, and other metros report children and teenagers placing two to four orders a day, often late at night, and rarely for household groceries. The data is stark: 39 per cent of households now report family members regularly ordering ultra-processed foods, up from 23 per cent just two years ago. This is not indulgence; it is habit formation at scale. Quick-commerce platforms are not passive mirrors of demand. Through notifications, discounts, flash deals, and algorithmic ranking, they actively train young users to associate hunger, boredom, stress, and reward with instant, ultra-processed calories.

Predictably, platforms defend themselves with the language of neutrality. “We are just marketplaces,” they claim. “We merely respond to consumer demand.” But neutrality collapses under scrutiny. In a physical store, a consumer might see five chocolate brands. Online, they see fifty, promoted, ranked, and nudged through algorithms optimised for conversion. Choice is never neutral when it is curated. The deeper failure is not the presence of junk food, but the invisibility of healthier alternatives. Platforms could easily rebalance design—pairing chips with healthier snacks, clearly flagging HFSS items (High in Fat, Sugar, or Salt ), or nudging even a fraction of users toward better options. If just three out of ten orders shifted away from ultra-processed foods, the public-health gains would be immense. But such nudges slow volume growth, and in the quick-commerce economy, volume is king.

This brings regulation—or the absence of it—into sharp focus. India has debated front-of-pack labelling for over a decade. Public-health advocates argue for simple, visible warnings—red labels for HFSS foods, as intuitive as veg and non-veg symbols. Industry prefers star ratings buried on the back of packs, knowing well that no tired consumer at midnight deciphers nutrition stars. The resistance is not technical; it is commercial. Brands fear revenue loss, platforms fear friction, and regulators move cautiously, trapped between health mandates and corporate pressure. Ironically, digital platforms could implement clear nutritional warnings far more easily than physical packaging, yet even this remains stalled.

The health consequences, meanwhile, are brutally real. Ultra-processed foods are linked to obesity, type-2 diabetes, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, kidney disorders, and even depression. The harm extends beyond sugar, salt, and fat to additives, emulsifiers, flavour enhancers, and the addictive design of these products. India’s ultra-processed food market is growing at over 13 per cent annually—one of the fastest rates globally. The danger lies not in an occasional snack but in diet displacement, where ultra-processed foods replace real food entirely. For children and adolescents, this sets lifelong risk trajectories that no fitness app or late-life discipline can reverse.

Quick commerce, like physical retail, cannot and should not be dismantled. But it must be governed. Clear HFSS definitions, mandatory digital warnings, advertising restrictions, and algorithmic accountability are no longer optional. Voluntary restraint has failed worldwide. The conflict is stark and unresolved: public health versus profit. Food companies invest heavily in celebrity endorsements and health-washing narratives because they work. Platforms shape taste, loyalty, and habit at the most vulnerable ages because they can. The cost of inaction is generational. Convenience may deliver food in ten minutes, but its consequences will linger for decades. If India does not intervene now, it will wake up to a future where speed won the market—and quietly lost the nation’s health.

Visit arjasrikanth.in for more insights