UPF Giants Filed 235 Lawsuits to Stall Health Rules, Losing 75% of Resolved Cases
Updated
Updated · The Guardian · Jul 22
UPF Giants Filed 235 Lawsuits to Stall Health Rules, Losing 75% of Resolved Cases
2 articles · Updated · The Guardian · Jul 22
Summary
A cross-border investigation found ultra-processed food companies and their trade groups lodged 235 lawsuits from 2010 to 2025 against warning labels, junk-food taxes and marketing curbs in five countries.
Three-quarters of the cases were filed by manufacturers or their associations, and 38% of identifiable suits came from eight parent groups including Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Mondelēz, Kellogg’s, Danone and Ferrero.
Governments won about 75% of resolved cases, but the litigation still stretched to nearly 600 cumulative years in court and delayed some health measures for years while raising legal and healthcare costs.
Mexico accounted for 193 lawsuits, far ahead of Colombia's 18 and Brazil's 17, reflecting Latin America's role as an early testing ground for tougher food-policy rules and industry resistance.
Researchers and public-health experts said the strategy mirrors tobacco-industry tactics: even unsuccessful suits can chill regulators as UPF consumption keeps rising and is linked to obesity, diabetes, heart disease and mental ill health.
Why are nearly all 235 corporate lawsuits against food laws concentrated in Latin America, and what can other nations learn?
Big Food used Big Tobacco's playbook for decades. Will it now face the same multi-billion dollar legal fate?
If science shows ultra-processed food is addictive, why do regulations consistently fail to protect the public from its harms?
Ultra-Processed Food Lawsuits in the U.S. (2025–2026): High Dismissal Rates, Causation Challenges, and the Push for a Federal Definition
Overview
Since early 2025, lawsuits against ultra-processed food companies have surged in the United States, but most face high dismissal rates. The main challenge for plaintiffs is proving a direct link between consuming these foods and specific health problems, as courts require strong scientific evidence. This difficulty, highlighted by the recent Martinez case, has become the central legal hurdle and leads to many cases being dismissed. The ongoing struggle to establish causation shapes the current legal landscape, making it hard for individuals to hold food companies accountable for alleged health harms.