San Francisco Targets Big Food in First Major Ultra-Processed Foods Lawsuit
San Francisco is suing 10 of the country’s largest food manufacturers, alleging they engineered ultra-processed foods to be addictive and harmful. The city claims these manufacturers are fueling the rising rates of chronic disease while leaving taxpayers to absorb the medical costs.
This lawsuit against ultra-processed food makers is the biggest test yet of whether companies like Kraft Heinz, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Nestlé can be held accountable for the health impacts tied to their products.
“These companies created a public health crisis with the engineering and marketing of ultra-processed foods,” San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu said in a statement. “They took food and made it unrecognizable and harmful to the human body. These companies engineered a public health crisis, they profited handsomely, and now they need to take responsibility for the harm they have caused.”
A recent landmark UPF case, filed by a teen who claimed he developed Type 2 diabetes and fatty liver disease from eating ultra-processed foods, was dismissed earlier this fall because the judge said the teen hadn’t tied his illnesses to specific foods.
The filing of this lawsuit is expected to renew interest in personal injury claims against UPF makers.
What the Lawsuit Says
The 62-page complaint, filed in early December, accuses the companies of knowingly making foods that are easy to overeat, then heavily marketing them to kids. It claims these companies have kept quiet about research that links their foods to obesity, diabetes and other chronic diseases.
The suit names The Kraft Heinz Company, Mondelez International, Post Holdings, The Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, General Mills, Nestlé USA, Kellogg, Mars Incorporated and Conagra Brands as defendants, accusing them of using marketing tactics similar to Big Tobacco.
“The health concerns around ultra-processed foods are not solely about the amount of calories, fat, sugar, salt or carbohydrates consumed. Ultra-processed foods themselves cause unique health risks. The high levels of processing change the physical and chemical structure of the foods and change how humans digest them,” the city wrote in a press release.
The suit also highlights the broader cost of treating diet-related diseases. It says conditions like diabetes and heart disease place billions in annual costs on public programs such as Medi-Cal, and argues that the widespread consumption of UPFs has added to that burden.
What Are Ultra-Processed Foods
Ultra-processed foods are made by breaking down whole foods and rebuilding them with additives like flavor enhancers, emulsifiers and artificial sweeteners.
Foods like candies, chips, processed meats, soda, energy drinks, breakfast cereals, and boxed macaroni and cheese are all considered UPFs, because they cannot usually be made in a home kitchen and require industrial methods.
According to the NOVA classification system, a scientific framework that categorizes food, ultra-processed foods aren’t traditional foods at all, but industrial formulations made from sugars, oils, starches and additives that create intense flavor, low costs and a long shelf life.
The U.S. Food & Drug Administration states that research has linked UPFs to chronic diseases like cardiovascular disease, obesity and cancer. An estimated 70% of the food in the U.S. is made up of UPFs, and children get more than 60% of their calories from such foods.
Three recent papers published in The Lancet also reported connections between ultra-processed foods and health risks across multiple organ systems.
Why the Case Matters Nationally
San Francisco accuses the defendants of violating California’s Unfair Competition Law and public nuisance statute, alleging the companies engage in unfair and deceptive acts to sell their UPFs.
A successful case could pressure manufacturers to change how these foods are formulated and marketed, paving the way for other jurisdictions to pursue similar cases. It could also force the companies to pay restitution and civil penalties.
“This case is about protecting the health and wellness of San Franciscans—and setting a precedent that will benefit communities across the country,” said Morgan & Morgan’s Rene Rocha, Partner, co-chair of Environmental & Toxic Tort Litigation. “Together, we aim to ensure that public health takes priority over corporate profits.”
