The Rise of Influence Liability

Caso judicial histórico contra grandes fabricantes de alimentos ultra processados, levanta importantes questões sobre a crescente tendência de responsabilização de pessoas, empresa, e suas influências na saúde pública.

A recent litigation in the United States, ‘born historic’ in terms of ultra-processed foods, reflects a trend that we are seeing more and more in the country and the world, not only in the food sector, but also in a broader discussion about the civil liability of people and companies for damage caused to public and individual health.

The litigation was brought by an American, Bryce Martinez, against 11 major manufacturers of ultra-processed foods. Martinez, who was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and hepatic steatosis at the age of 18, claims that the industries acted negligently, concealing information about the composition of these products and their health risks. The lawsuit also questions marketing practices aimed especially at children, pointing to illegal advertising strategies, such as the association of popular characters, for example, to promote the consumption of products that have been proven to be harmful to health.

The case is important because, as well as questioning commercial practices involving foods that have historically been linked to serious damage to health, it follows a similar logic to previous actions against the tobacco industry. Just as the ‘economics of addiction’ was discussed in the context of tobacco, a similar question now arises with ultra-processed foods: should companies be held responsible for the damage they cause to consumers' health? In addition, the case also raises a debate that has been gaining momentum about the quality and care taken with advertising, marketing and publicising products, especially when these methods are aimed at a vulnerable public, such as children.

The lack of effective control over advertising, especially aimed at children, has been a central issue in many countries, including Brazil. In the Brazilian context, the growing impact of ultra-processed foods has prompted significant progress in the creation of regulatory standards, such as on the composition of the basic food basket (Decree 11.936/24), on restrictions in school environments (Decree 11.821/23) and on the excise duty on sugary drinks (Complementary Law 214/25). Earlier this year, the purchase of ultra-processed foods with funds from the National School Feeding Programme was reduced to 15% (FNDE Resolution 03/25). These actions reflect a change in the Brazilian government's approach to public health and food.

Although the Martinez case is still ongoing and it is not possible to predict its outcome, it raises a relevant discussion about the responsibility of companies in relation to public health and the transparency of information provided to consumers. The case can be seen as a window of opportunity for significant changes in regulation and oversight, both in the United States and in other countries.

In Brazil, the judicialisation of issues related to health and the consumption of unhealthy products, such as ultra-processed foods, has the potential to grow in the coming years.

With the judicial system becoming increasingly active, the civil liability of companies could be questioned more forcefully, with significant implications for the way the food industry operates in the country.

In a scenario in which the scientific evidence on the harmful effects of these products is becoming increasingly clear, society and the market must prepare for a new era of greater transparency and responsibility on the part of companies when it comes to providing food.