The City of San Francisco has filed a historic lawsuit against 10 ultra-processed food (UPF) manufacturers, seeking “restitution and civil penalties” to help local governments to “offset astronomical health care costs associated with UPF consumption”.

The 10 companies are Kraft Heinz Company, Mondelez International, Post Holdings, The Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, General Mills, Nestle USA, Kellogg, Mars Incorporated, and ConAgra Brands, which make the bulk of UPF in the US.

The first-of-its-kind lawsuit, filed on Tuesday on behalf of the people of the State of California, alleges that the companies used “unfair and deceptive acts” to sell and market their products, violating California’s Unfair Competition Law and public nuisance statute. 

Aside from restitution, the City wants the companies to stop using “deceptive marketing” and “take action to correct or lessen the effects of their behavior”. 

“This case is about food products whose ingredients and manufacturing processes interrupt our bodies’ abilities to function. It is about the Defendants – gigantic food conglomerates, all – who designed, manufactured, marketed, and sold these foods knowing they were dangerous for human consumption,” the City argues.

San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu told a media briefing: “They took food and made it unrecognisable and harmful to the human body.”

Comparing the UPF companies’ tactics to those used by tobacco companies, Chui said: “We must be clear that this is not about consumers making better choices. Recent surveys show Americans want to avoid ultra-processed foods, but we are inundated by them. These companies engineered a public health crisis, they profited handsomely, and now they need to take responsibility for the harm they have caused.”

UPF stimulates cravings

San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie added: “San Francisco families deserve to know what’s in their food. We’re not going to let our residents be misled about the products in our grocery stores. We are going to stand up for public health and give parents the information they need to keep themselves and their kids safe and healthy.”

The court papers define UPF as “former whole foods that have been broken down, chemically modified, combined with additives, and then reassembled using industrial techniques such as molding, extrusion, and pressurization. 

Some contain additives unique to UPF, including “colors, flavor enhancers, emulsifiers, artificial sweeteners, thickeners, and foaming, anti-foaming, bulking, and gelling agents”. 

These foods are a “combination of chemicals designed to stimulate cravings and encourage overconsumption”. UPF makes up some 70% of food consumed in the US.

The consumption of UPF has been linked to Type 2 diabetes, fatty liver disease, cardiovascular disease, colorectal cancer, and depression.

Protecting communities

“This lawsuit is a critical step toward protecting the health of our communities,” said San Francisco Director of Health Daniel Tsai. “For decades, ultra-processed foods have reshaped our diets. 

“These products are not just unhealthy, they are engineered to be addictive, disproportionately harm low-income communities and communities of color, and contribute to rising rates of chronic illness like diabetes, heart disease, and cancer,”  said San Francisco Director of Health Daniel Tsai.

The City’s court papers also argue that UPF marketing campaigns “disproportionately targeted Black and Latino children, who have been targeted with 70% more ads for ultra-processed foods than their white counterparts”.

The prevalence of diabetes among Black Americans has quadrupled in the past 30 years, and Black Americans are 70% more likely to develop diabetes than White Americans, according to the court papers.

Largest review of UPF

The court case, the first such action by a municipality, comes a few weeks after the world’s largest review of UPF was published in The Lancet.

The three-part review argues that the rise in UPF “is driven by powerful global corporations who employ sophisticated political tactics to protect and maximise profits”. 

The review stresses that education aimed at individual behaviour change is not enough: “Deteriorating diets are an urgent public health threat that requires coordinated policies and advocacy to regulate and reduce ultra-processed foods and improve access to fresh and minimally processed foods.”

The series provides hundreds of studies to prove its thesis that UPF is displacing long-established dietary patterns centred on whole foods, and this is “a key driver of the escalating global burden of multiple diet-related chronic diseases”.

Using evidence from national food intake surveys, large cohorts, and interventional studies, the review highlights global patterns of “gross nutrient imbalances”. It shows that overeating is driven by the “high energy density, hyper-palatability, soft texture, and disrupted food matrices” of UPFs, and the rise of UPF has led to the consumption of “toxic compounds, endocrine disruptors, and potentially harmful classes and mixtures of food additives”.

The Lancet editorial published alongside the review notes that “the rise of UPFs in human diets is damaging public health, fuelling chronic diseases worldwide, and deepening health inequalities”.

“Addressing this challenge requires a unified global response that confronts corporate power and transforms food systems to promote healthier, more sustainable diets.”

The series advocates for a food system based on local food producers, preserving cultural foods and ensuring economic benefits for communities.

Image Credits: City of San Francisco.