The FDA comment period closes January 26, 2026. Will 70-year-old safety standards finally catch up to 21st-century food engineering? Source
UPF In the News
Virginia Tech Research Links Sugary Sodas to Poor Brain Health Outcomes Over Time
Virginia Tech researchers analyzing long-term dietary patterns found that consumption of sugary sodas, a category of ultra-processed beverages, is specifically linked to declines in brain health outcomes over time, independent of overall caloric intake or body weight.
When specific UPF subcategories can be isolated as brain health risk factors even after controlling for obesity and total energy consumption, it dismantles the industry’s core defense that “it’s not the food, it’s the calories”, and makes product-specific transparency essential because not all UPFs carry equivalent neurological risk. Source
UPF Daily Insight
UPF Lawsuits Continue to Occur
“The Court is deeply concerned about the practices used to create and market UPFs, and the deleterious effect UPFs have on children and the American diet.” – Judge Mia Perez, U.S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania, August 2025 dismissal order in Martinez v. Kraft Heinz
UPF Legal Update
Martinez v. Kraft Heinz Reinstatement Motion Pending Since November 2025 – Round Two in Progress
Plaintiff Bryce Martinez filed a motion to amend his dismissed complaint in late November 2025, seeking to reinstate his lawsuit against Kraft Heinz, Coca-Cola, and other major UPF manufacturers by addressing the procedural deficiencies that led Judge Mia Perez to grant defendants’ motion to dismiss in August 2025. The original dismissal cited insufficient evidence linking specific UPF products to Martinez’s Type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease diagnoses, as well as failure to name the exact products he consumed.
Notably, Judge Perez’s dismissal order included the statement that she is “deeply concerned about the practices used to create and market UPFs, and the deleterious effect UPFs have on children and the American diet,” signaling judicial receptivity to a better-substantiated complaint.
The amended complaint remains under court review as of January 2026, with legal analysts noting that the judge did not reach defendants’ other dismissal arguments – including First Amendment challenges, federal preemption defenses, and specific cause-of-action objections – meaning those issues will be litigated if the amended complaint survives initial review. Source