Consumer Argues Food Manufacturers Concealed UPF Diabetes, Fatty Liver Disease Risks for Children

In response to a motion to dismiss, plaintiff argues the food industry cannot escape liability for injuries caused by ultra-processed food (UPF), since they defrauded the public.

A Pennsylvania man is pushing back at efforts to have a lawsuit thrown out, which alleges he developed type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) as a teen due to the widespread marketing of ultra-processed foods (UPF) to children.

Bryce Martinez filed the UPF lawsuit in December 2024, which is believed to be the first complaint of its kind, alleging that he consistently consumed a variety of ultra-processed foods during his childhood, and that the addictive nature and nutritional deficiencies of the popular junk food products directly contributed to his development of type 2 diabetes and fatty liver disease as a child.

The lawsuit named Kraft Heinz, Mondelez, Post Holdings, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, General Mills, Nestlé, Kellanova, WK Kellogg Co., Mars, and ConAgra as defendants, who filed a motion to dismiss the claim in late March, arguing that Martinez’s lawsuit is improperly pled and takes a “shotgun” approach, which implies that the claims are broad, vague, and lack specific legal grounding.

Ultra-Processed Food Health Concerns

Ultra-processed foods include a wide variety of products sold in recent decades, which are made from heavily refined ingredients combined with additives designed to mimic the taste, appearance and texture of real food. Examples include popular sugary breakfast cereals, snack chips, frozen ready-to-eat meals, sodas and other items.

The substances added to ultra-processed foods, such as emulsifiers, artificial sweeteners and preservatives, are used to enhance taste, texture and shelf-life, while offering no real nutritional benefits. However, there is now growing evidence that ultra-processed food increases the risk of diabetes and other chronic diseases, especially among children.

Martinez’s lawsuit heralds what many anticipate will be an influx of junk food lawsuits likely to be brought by families nationwide in the coming years, as public concern grows amid recent landmark studies linking processed food products to serious health risks for children.

Late last month, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released a report warning that ultra-processed foods are a major contributor to chronic childhood diseases, indicating that 70% of U.S. children’s calories come from ultra-processed foods.

In response to the manufacturers’ motion to dismiss the claim, Martinez filed a response (PDF) on May 30, arguing that the food industry should not be immune from liability since it has intentionally misled parents into feeding unhealthy products to children, which they knew would cause harm.

The response argues that Martinez’s claims are sufficiently pled, and that the manufacturer’s arguments to have the case thrown out lack merit and legal historical precedent.

“Now, Defendants essentially argue that they have immunity and that the courts cannot hold them responsible for concealing health risks from consumers, including Plaintiff,” Martinez notes in the response. “Defendants’ position would eradicate longstanding torts for failure to warn against any manufacturer in any industry—so long as the manufacturer does not concede causation—and would make manufacturers the sole arbiters of their own liability.”

Martinez characterizes the manufacturers’ arguments as “far afield from the law” and notes that their argument does not cite any previous cases in state or federal court precedent that backs up their calls to dismiss the lawsuit. He also points out that Defendants seem to argue they were legally permitted to fraudulently conceal health risks from children and their parents, as long as they were not the plaintiffs’ fiduciaries.

The defending food manufacturers have until July 14 to file any final reply.

The judge’s determination on the motion is likely to have a significant impact on the number of individuals currently seeking representation to pursue similar claims, each asserting that routine consumption of ultra-processed foods has led to the development of type 2 diabetes or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in themselves or their children.

As the court considers the fate of Martinez’s lawsuit, ultra-processed food lawyers are continuing to review new cases for children and young adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease after regularly consuming ultra-processed foods throughout their childhood.