San Francisco will file the nation’s first government lawsuit against food manufacturers over ultra-processed foods (UPFs) on Tuesday, arguing that local governments have been shouldering the costs of treating diseases that stem from public consumption of the companies’ products.
The city’s attorney, David Chiu, told the New York Times they will sue 10 corporations that create some of the country’s most popular food and drinks, from chicken nuggets and frozen pizzas to potato chips and sugary breakfast cereals – but also foods like breads and granola bars that are marketed as “healthy”.
UPFs are industrially manufactured food products and contain ingredients not found in the average home kitchen, such as preservatives, flavor enhancers, artificial colors and emulsifiers, with little to no whole food content. It is estimated that more than 70% of the US food supply is composed of foods commonly considered ultra-processed, and that children get over 60% of their calories from such foods.
The world’s largest review, published last month, found that UPFs are linked to harm in every major organ system of the human body and pose a seismic threat to global health. They are associated with an increased risk of a dozen health conditions, including cancer, obesity, type 2 diabetes, depression, heart disease and cognitive decline.
That review also found that global corporations, not individual choices, are driving the rise of UPFs. UPFs are a leading cause of the “chronic disease pandemic” linked to diet, with food companies putting profit above all else, the authors said.
Chiu’s lawsuit, which will be filed in the San Francisco superior court on behalf of the state of California, will seek unspecified damages for the costs that cities and counties bear for treating residents whose health has been harmed by ultra-processed food.
San Francisco accuses the companies of “unfair and deceptive acts” in how they market and sell their foods, arguing that such practices violate the state’s unfair competition law and public nuisance statute. It also argues the companies knew that their food made people sick but sold it anyway.
“It makes me sick that generations of kids and parents are being deceived and buying food that’s not food,” Chiu told the Times.
It marks a rare moment of alignment between liberal San Francisco and the Trump administration. Donald Trump’s health and human services secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, has railed against UPFs – one of his least polarizing stances – as part of his Make America Healthy Again mission, urging Americans to limit their consumption of foods with added sugar, salt, fat, dyes and preservatives.
Chiu stressed to the NYT that he did not agree with Kennedy on other health topics, including vaccine skepticism. But he said that the science was indisputable when it comes to ultra-processed foods. “Many of the perspectives of this administration are not backed by science, but this is different,” Chiu said. “Even a broken clock is right twice a day.”
The defendants in the lawsuit include the Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, Kraft Heinz Company, Post Holdings and Mondelez International. It also names General Mills; Nestlé USA; Kellogg; Mars Incorporated; and ConAgra Brands.
Earlier this year, California passed a bipartisan bill that became the first in the US to provide a statutory definition of UPFs, and laid a foundation for banning them from schools. California has also banned several additives, including food dyes, linked to behavioral difficulties in children, in schools. In 2010, San Francisco banned fast-food restaurants from giving free toys.
The city attorney’s office also has a track record of winning against big corporations on public health matters, including tobacco companies, lead paint manufacturers and opioid manufacturers, distributors and dispensers.