Some years ago, many brands in Mexico reformulated their products to avoid the black stamps required by NOM-051, in an attempt to adapt to a stricter regulation on caloric content, sugars, sodium and fat. The objective: comply with the norm and maintain the attractiveness of the consumer. Incidentally, this regulation that filled the products with stamps, has had good results in many aspects. The interesting thing is that today, something similar begins to be observed in another terrain: that of rehydration drinks.
This type of products has gained ground in Mexico. Associated with well -being, physical recovery and even everyday use, brands such as Gatorade, Powerade, Suerox and Electrolit are found in supermarkets, gyms and convenience stores, as part of an expanding category. The popularity of these drinks responds not only to their functionality, but also to their position in the market and to the taste of the consumer.
Although they share similar objectives, their regulation is not necessarily homogeneous. A clear example is the case of Electrolit, a legally recorded product as an oral rehydration solution (SRO) before the health authority, which technically classifies it as a medicine. This category has important implications, since it exempts from the product of the IEPS and VAT payment, unlike the other mentioned drinks that operate under a different fiscal framework.
Read more: Trump says that there will soon be details about furniture tariffs
Functional drinks and fiscal legislation: a half full glass
According to the WHO criteria, an oral rehydration solution must have a molar-glucose proportion close to 1: 1. In the case of these drinks in our country, some studies have reported different proportions, possibly oriented to improve the taste or user experience. This characteristic, together with its wide distribution and daily use, has generated questions about whether the current regulatory framework should adapt to new consumption patterns.
In fact, some legislative initiatives have already been presented that seek to review the fiscal treatment of products with this type of classifications, especially when their use and commercialization move away from the clinical context and approach mass consumption more. These proposals are still under discussion, but they mark a sign that the issue is already on the public agenda.
Now, beyond legal and fiscal nuances, Electrolit has managed to find an important place in the heart of Mexican consumers. Its ability to position itself as a functional, accessible and effective drink, mostly in non -medical scenarios, such as to cure the raw, is worth studying. Because while not every day is debated about their proportion of glucose, many do have it in mind for those hard mornings of severe dehydration.
It is not about questioning the legal status of a product, but about observing how certain categories evolve at the intersection between health, market and regulation. Should the medical classification be maintained when the use is mostly commercial? Is it necessary to rethink the fiscal and health criteria from how consumers use certain products today?
Rather than pointing out, these types of cases invites you to open the conversation about how habits change, how brands respond and how legislation can accompany these processes in a clear, equitable and transparent way.
You may be interested: Super Bowl: Bad Bunny and Spanish as a flag
