235 lawsuits reveal efforts by ultra-processed food companies to disrupt health laws

The global confrontation with ultra-processed foods is expanding from stores and nutrition laboratories to courtrooms, after several governments began imposing warning labels, taxes and marketing restrictions on products linked to unhealthy diets.

An international investigation revealed that 235 lawsuits were filed against health policies adopted by the governments of five countries during the period from 2010 to 2025, in moves aimed at canceling some measures, weakening them, or delaying their implementation. The cases included Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, the United States, and the United Kingdom, coinciding with the expansion of consumption of these products in various parts of the world.

and is acquiredThe issue is increasingly important, with the share of ultra-processed foods accounting for nearly half the average diet in countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia, and studies linking their excessive intake to obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, mental health disorders and other health problems.

235 lawsuits against public health policies

The investigation, carried out in collaboration between The Guardian newspaper, researchers and media organizations on four continents, found 235 lawsuits linked to policies targeting ultra-processed foods.

Manufacturers or the trade associations that represent them filed about three-quarters of these lawsuits, while the identity of some plaintiffs remained unannounced, after companies asked the courts to withhold their names.

38% of the cases were also linked to…Its owners can be identified with eight parent companies: Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Mondelez, Kellogg’s, Danone, Ferrero, Xenox, and Heartland Food Products Group.

In this context, the lawsuits focused mainly on the warning labels placed on the front of the packages, then the taxes imposed on unhealthy products, and the restrictions that limit their marketing and advertising, especially those directed to children.

The issue is related to the twelfth goal of responsible consumption and production, as consumers need clear information about products’ ingredients and their effects, while companies bear responsibility for developing more balanced and transparent products.

What are ultra-processed foods?

Ultra-processed foods include products made using industrial processes and ingredientsFlavors, colorings, emulsifiers, and substances used to improve texture and taste and extend shelf life are not commonly found in home kitchens.

These products are spreading rapidly due to the low prices of many of them, their ease of storage and consumption, and their wide availability. This spread has contributed to the displacement of fresh foods and home-prepared meals from multiple diets on various continents.

A scientific review in which 43 experts participated and published by The Lancet indicated that diets rich in these products are linked to overeating, poor nutritional value, and increased exposure to some harmful substances and additives.

In the face of these risks, governments have tended to adopt policies that help consumers make more informed food decisions and reduce the attractiveness of unproductive products.health, and reduce children’s exposure to associated advertising.

Warning labels take center stage in the conflict

Warning labels on packages have been at the forefront of legal challenges from food companies, due to their direct impact on product image and consumer decisions.

These labels indicate the product’s high sugar, fat, salt, or calorie content, allowing the consumer to quickly evaluate it before purchasing. Food labeling systems also pave the way for other measures, such as imposing taxes or placing additional restrictions on advertising and marketing.

Melissa Millon, an associate professor at the French National Institute for Health and Medical Research, believes that companies’ resistance to these labels is linked to their role in classifying products according to their health impact, which later makes it easier to subject them to taxes orMarketing restrictions.

Companies lose cases and gain time

Food companies lost about three-quarters of the cases in which final rulings were issued, according to the results of the investigation. However, the lawsuits have had an impact beyond the court ruling itself, with some disputes extending over many years and delaying the implementation of important health measures.

When the lengths of the various cases are added together, the total time taken by the legal battles reached approximately 600 years. This litigation imposed significant financial and administrative burdens on governments and health officials, who were forced to allocate resources and expertise to defending the laws before the courts.

Experts point out that the intensity of lawsuits achieves several goals for companies, including slowing down the implementation of rules and reducing the ability of governments to take action.New procedures, creating a state of caution among regulatory authorities.

These results show that the company’s loss of the case may come after years of delay, during which health policies are frozen or partially implemented, while the consumption of the products targeted by regulation continues.

Latin America is at the heart of the confrontation

Mexico had the largest number of cases with 193 cases, followed by Colombia with 18 cases, then Brazil with 17 cases. The United States recorded six cases, while one case appeared in the United Kingdom.

This concentration is linked to the early role played by Latin American countries in developing strong food policies, including warning labels, taxes, and marketing restrictions. The region has become a space to test the ability of these measures to change consumer behavior, and over timeItself an arena of corporate resistance.

Mexico is one of the countries that has explicitly recommended that its citizens limit ultra-processed foods, as part of its efforts to confront the high rates of obesity and diet-related diseases.

Addressing ultra-processed foods is linked to several aspects of sustainable development, most notably Goal 3 on good health and well-being, given the burdens that diet-related chronic diseases impose on individuals and health systems.

A strategy similar to the methods of tobacco companies

Experts compared food companies’ legal practices with methods the tobacco industry has used for decades to combat standardized packaging, health warnings and advertising restrictions.

Tobacco companies filed numerous lawsuits againstGovernments imposed simple packaging with clear health warnings and pictures. These lawsuits increased the costs of regulation and prolonged periods of conflict, although the governments succeeded in resolving most of them.

Marion Nestle, professor of nutrition and public health at New York University, believes that the intensity of companies’ resistance reflects the impact of policies on sales, noting that the food industry benefits from the previous experiences of the tobacco industry in using litigation as a tool for pressure and delay.

Philip Baker, an associate professor at the University of Sydney, also believes that the size and length of the lawsuits and the ambiguity of the identity of some plaintiffs reveal a broader function of litigation, which includes deterrence and restricting the ability of regulators to act.

Britain and regulatory loopholes

The United Kingdom registered only one case within the investigation, while experts believe that this limited number is related to the nature of the investigationBritish regulatory environment.

Chris van Tulleken, professor of infection and global health at University College London, said the British rules include multiple loopholes and exceptions, and the industry has been involved for decades in drafting some of the regulations governing unhealthy products.

According to his opinion, fear of lawsuits contributed to creating a state of stagnation among some government agencies, and weakened enthusiasm for implementing more stringent measures.

Reports previously revealed that the British government had withdrawn guidelines that called on stores to promote nutritious and less processed foods, after a pressure campaign in which companies working in the sector participated.

This is linked to the sixteenth goal of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which is concerned with peace, justice and strong institutions, as effective health regulation depends on the ability of governments to issueLaws and defending them before the courts, and providing the necessary expertise and resources to confront long-term disputes and protect the public interest.

Companies defend their positions

Coca-Cola stressed that confronting public health challenges requires cooperation between governments, health authorities, the private sector and civil society, noting its commitment to constructive dialogue on issues that affect its work.

Ferrero said that her engagement with authorities and regulators focused on clarity in the implementation of policies and consistency in their application to similar products, while supporting the goals aimed at reducing obesity and food-related diseases.

In turn, Danone stressed that companies can play a positive role alongside governments and health institutions, and that it is committed to open dialogue with policy makers. PepsiCo and Mondelez did not provideKellogg, Xenioux and Heartland responded to requests for comment in the investigation.

Health laws need legal protection

The investigation reveals that the battle to limit the harm of ultra-processed foods extends across markets, courts and decision-making centres. Companies sometimes succeed in delaying policies even as they lose final rulings, allowing harmful consumption patterns to persist and their high health and economic costs.

Confronting these challenges requires clear legislation, strong scientific evidence, transparency about those who challenge the laws, in addition to legal and financial support for health institutions.

The Earth Guards Foundation stresses the necessity of building more sustainable food systems, starting with protecting the consumer’s right to obtainClear information, enhancing corporate responsibility for the impact of their products, and supporting enterprises’ ability to implement laws efficiently. As consumption of ultra-processed foods increases, rapid implementation of health policies is key to protecting children and adults, and reducing the long-term health and economic burdens on societies.