San Francisco Sues 10 Food Giants Over Harmful Ultraprocessed Products

San Francisco filed a lawsuit on Tuesday accusing 10 major food manufacturers of knowingly marketing and selling ultraprocessed foods that contribute to serious health problems and are engineered to encourage overconsumption.

The complaint, filed in San Francisco County Superior Court, alleges the companies used "deceitful tactics" to promote products the city says are "dangerous for human consumption," and that the widespread availability of these foods has produced a local and national public health crisis and rising medical costs for governments.

Named defendants include:

• Kraft Heinz Company
• Mondelez International
• Post Holdings
• The Coca-Cola Company
• PepsiCo
• General Mills
• Nestle USA
• Kellogg
• Mars Incorporated
• ConAgra Brands

San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu said research has reached a tipping point on the harms of these products and that they are "deeply linked to serious health conditions, imposing enormous costs on millions of Americans and cities and states across our country." The suit seeks to hold manufacturers accountable for those costs and practices.

The term ultraprocessed foods commonly describes items such as flavored chips, sweetened granola bars and sugary sodas that contain industrial ingredients, additives, preservatives and are often high in sugar, saturated fat and sodium. A growing body of evidence — including a recent comprehensive review in The Lancet — associates high consumption of ultraprocessed foods with higher rates of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and premature death.

The industry trade group Consumer Brands Association disputed efforts to single out processed foods. Sarah Gallo, senior vice president for product policy, said there is no single agreed scientific definition of "ultraprocessed" and warned against demonizing processed items without considering full nutrient content. Researchers and public-health experts, however, point to established classification systems (such as the NOVA framework) and decades of evidence linking highly processed products to poor diet-related outcomes.

“Anytime I see public actors like the city of San Francisco or state level attorneys interested in litigation, I'm encouraged, because that's how we got the attention of the tobacco companies back in the 1990s,” said Laura Schmidt, a professor at the Institute for Health Policy Studies at UCSF, drawing a parallel with past tobacco litigation.

Nutrition researchers note the market dominance of these foods since the 1980s and a marked shift in dietary patterns: estimates cited by experts place ultraprocessed products at roughly three-quarters of children's diets and more than half of adults' calorie intake in some surveys. Authors of the Lancet review concluded that ultraprocessed foods promote overeating, worsen diet quality, and are likely driving rising chronic disease trends worldwide.

The lawsuit represents an uncommon legal strategy to challenge food-industry practices. Observers say the case could signal increased regulatory and legal scrutiny of food manufacturers if other jurisdictions pursue similar claims. The companies named in the suit have been contacted for comment.