The city of San Francisco on Tuesday sued 10 major food companies, alleging they marketed and marketed ultra-processed foods that they knew were harmful to human health and designed to be addictive.
The lawsuit alleges that these products have contributed to a public health crisis in San Francisco and across the country by burdening cities and other governments with medical costs associated with the effects of a diet high in processed foods. This is a first-of-its-kind effort to hold food conglomerates accountable for the distribution of these products and their identified health risks.
“We have reached a tipping point in the scientific research on the dangers of these products,” David Chiu, San Francisco city attorney, said at a news conference Tuesday morning. He added that “these foods in our diet are deeply linked to serious diseases, imposing enormous costs on millions of Americans and on cities and states across our country.”
The term “ultra-processed foods” typically includes foods such as flavored chips, sugary granola bars and sodas, which contain synthetic compounds, preservatives and additives and are often high in saturated fat, sodium or sugar. Research has linked these products to increased risk of obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular diseaseamong other conditions, and early death.
The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco County Superior Court, alleges that the companies knew the food products were “hazardous for human consumption” and that they used “deceptive tactics” to promote and sell their products.
The 10 defendants named are Kraft Heinz Company, Mondelez International, Post Holdings, The Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, General Mills, Nestle USA, Kellogg, Mars Incorporated and ConAgra Brands.
NBC News asked each company for comment. No one responded immediately to requests.
Sarah Gallo, senior vice president of product policy for the Consumer Brands Association, a trade organization for major food and beverage brands, said in a statement that “the creators of America's trusted at-home brands are supporting Americans in making healthier choices and increasing product transparency.”
“There is currently no agreed upon scientific definition of ultra-processed foods, and attempts to classify foods as unhealthy simply because they are processed, or to demonize foods by ignoring their full nutrient content, are misleading to consumers and exacerbating health inequities,” Gallo wrote in a statement. “The companies adhere to the strict science-based safety standards set by the FDA to deliver the safe, affordable and convenient products that consumers depend on every day. Americans deserve facts based on sound science to make the best choices for their health.”
The lawsuit comes amid increased attention to ultra-processed foods on both sides of the political aisle. Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy Jr. opposed these products as a core tenet of his Make America Healthy Again program. plans to eliminate artificial food colors from food products over the next year.
Now a lawyer from a California city known for its progressive politics is taking up this issue.
“For some reason there is overlap,” said Laura Schmidt, a professor at the Institute for Health Policy Research at the University of California, San Francisco, referring to bipartisan opposition. “This is an area that hasn’t really been a political issue.”
She added: “So far it's been like a train wreck in slow motion. I've been talking about childhood diabetes for a couple of decades now. Disease rates continue to rise. Childhood fatty liver disease, childhood obesity – we've known for a long time that there was something wrong with this part of the food supply.”
Schmidt disagreed with the trade association's contention that there is no scientific definition of “ultra-processed” food.
She said the city attorney's case reminds her of the tobacco industry lawsuit.
“Every time I see community leaders like the city of San Francisco or state-level attorneys interested in litigation, I get encouraged because that's how we got the attention of the tobacco companies back in the 1990s,” Schmidt said. (Tobacco conglomerates Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds even acquired several food companies in the 1980s. Philip Morris, for example, acquired Kraft Foods in 1988 and then spun off the brand in 2007.)
Barry Popkin, a professor of nutrition at the University of North Carolina, says ultra-processed foods began making their way into the U.S. market in the 1980s and have since become ubiquitous. Researchers began focusing on their negative health effects about 10 to 15 years ago, he said.
“75% to 80% of what children eat comes from these ultra-processed foods, and 55% to 60% of what adults consume comes from them,” Popkin said. “You can't compare the way people ate during and immediately after World War II, or in previous decades, with the way we eat now.”
Last month, the scientific journal The Lancet published a comprehensive review of the health effects of ultra-processed foods, which assessed hundreds of studies and data from national food surveys.
The authors suggested that around the world, ultra-processed foods are impairing diets, leading to overeating and exposing people to toxins. The overall effect is an increase in chronic diseases, studies have shown.
Popkin contributed to some of the studies cited in the Lancet.
“We are unhealthy. Diet has a lot to do with it. We quit smoking, we have cholesterol medications, we have medications for heart disease, hypertension and so on, but food is killing us,” he said. “The most authoritative and most cited of all medical journals believed that this topic was worth introducing to the world.”
