Additional Coverage:
San Francisco Takes On Big Food, Accusing Manufacturers of Fueling Public Health Crisis
San Francisco is making headlines this week, having filed a groundbreaking lawsuit against ten major food manufacturers, including household names like Kraft Heinz and Coca-Cola. The city alleges these companies are intentionally contributing to a public health crisis through the production and aggressive marketing of ultra-processed foods.
City Attorney David Chiu officially launched the lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court on Tuesday. The core of the argument is that ultra-processed foods are directly linked to a surge in serious health conditions, such as Type 2 diabetes, fatty liver disease, and various forms of cancer.
“They took food and made it unrecognizable and harmful to the human body,” Chiu stated in a recent news release. He further emphasized, “These companies engineered a public health crisis, they profited handsomely, and now they need to take responsibility for the harm they have caused.”
The list of companies facing legal action is extensive and includes PepsiCo, Post Holdings, Mondelez International, General Mills, Nestle USA, Kellogg, Mars Incorporated, and ConAgra Brands, in addition to Kraft Heinz and Coca-Cola.
The lawsuit draws parallels between the food industry’s tactics and those historically employed by the tobacco industry, claiming that products are designed and marketed to create consumer addiction. San Francisco is accusing these manufacturers of violating California’s public nuisance and deceptive marketing laws.
According to the city’s legal filing, the proliferation of ultra-processed foods has coincided with a dramatic rise in rates of obesity, cancer, and diabetes. Chiu’s office highlights that heart disease and diabetes, both strongly associated with ultra-processed foods, are among the leading causes of death in San Francisco, with a disproportionate impact on minority and low-income communities.
When reached for comment, Sarah Gallo, senior vice president of product policy for the Consumer Brands Association, an organization representing many of the named companies, offered a counter-perspective. In a statement, Gallo asserted that there “is currently no agreed upon scientific definition of ultraprocessed foods and attempting to classify foods as unhealthy simply because they are processed, or demonizing food by ignoring its full nutrient content, misleads consumers and exacerbates health disparities.”
However, San Francisco’s lawsuit is bolstered by numerous scientific studies that reportedly connect ultra-processed foods to detrimental health outcomes. University of California, San Francisco, professor Kim Newell-Green echoed these concerns in the news release, noting, “Mounting research now links these products to serious diseases – including Type 2 diabetes, fatty liver disease, heart disease, colorectal cancer, and even depression at younger ages.”
Further supporting the city’s claims, a May report from U.S. Health Secretary Robert F.
Kennedy Jr. indicated that the Trump administration had identified ultra-processed foods as a significant contributor to chronic illness among American children. Additionally, in August, the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention revealed that over half of Americans’ daily caloric intake comes from ultra-processed foods, with common culprits including hamburgers, sandwiches, sweet bakery items, savory snacks, pizza, and sweetened beverages.
This legal action by San Francisco marks a significant moment, representing the first municipal lawsuit of its kind that directly accuses food companies of knowingly marketing addictive and harmful ultra-processed foods. The city is seeking financial restitution and civil penalties to help offset healthcare costs, alongside a court order that would prohibit deceptive marketing practices and compel the companies to alter their current operations.