Key Highlights
- Regulatory agencies are expected to establish clearer definitions and regulations for ultraprocessed foods, potentially mirroring the GMO labeling experience.
- The widespread adoption of GLP-1 drugs will continue to impact sales of snack foods, prompting reformulation and innovation for healthier options.
- The MAHA movement's focus on removing synthetic additives and its disdain for ultraprocessed foods will continue to be an influence this year.
Everything will be better this year, won’t it?
After a chaotic 2025, that’s a question without a sure answer. From regulatory and other government oversight issues to changing consumer trends to the financial health of food & beverage companies, there’s a lot of 2025 that needs to be resolved in 2026.
Foremost is how the current debate over ultraprocessed foods (UPFs) will play out. Harsh criticisms over the ill-defined category rose throughout 2025 and reached a fever pitch in the final months. At the current trajectory, the subject is likely to be addressed with some authority this year.
Which means that, in addition to reformulating products to remove the seven petroleum-based color additives and some other newly banned ingredients and adding some protein (is that still a thing?) and fiber, you may be redeveloping some products to look less ultraprocessed.
That’s not all you’ll be facing in the new year. Lurking in the shadows are the effects GLP-1 drugs will have on some food categories; what the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement will demand next; whether there will be 50 different state laws regulating ingredients; and the overall health of the business, with your company’s success front and center.
We’ll address them all below.
What’s an ultraprocessed food?
So far, the answer to that question has been “I’ll know it when I see it.”
UPFs received their most severe criticism yet Nov. 18, 2025, in The Lancet. The highly regarded, peer-reviewed medical journal published a three-paper series that describes a “UPF industry” that is “infiltrating government agencies … promoting corporate-friendly governance models [and] forms of regulation … and framing debate, generating favourable evidence, and manufacturing scientific doubt.”
The Lancet’s articles place the blame on “powerful global corporations who employ sophisticated political tactics to protect and maximise profits.” And they liken the situation to the clout Big Tobacco had in the 1980s – a tack that was first taken in an unsuccessful UPF class action lawsuit filed at the end of 2024 and dismissed (but not forgotten) last August.
A similar approach was taken by San Francisco’s city attorney in December when he filed a lawsuit against 10 food & beverage companies, “the country’s largest manufacturers of ultra-processed foods.” It claims “the food industry knew their products were making people sick,” and he wants the companies to pay to offset the resulting public health costs.
The 10 companies are essentially the same ones named in that December 2024 class action lawsuit in Philadelphia: Coca-Cola Co., Conagra Brands, General Mills, Kellogg Co., Kraft Heinz Co., Mars Inc., Mondelez International, Nestle USA, PepsiCo and Post Holdings.
“Processed foods have become a necessary cornerstone of feeding our growing global population, but their complexity has reached undesirable levels,” James Petrie wrote in news site The Green Queen. He’s CEO and co-founder of Australia’s Nourish Ingredients – which calls itself “a deep tech company leading in animal-free fats and precision fermentation.” He added: “Today’s food labels often read like chemistry textbooks, leaving consumers increasingly wary of what they’re putting into their bodies.”
But there is no agreed-upon scientific definition of ultraprocessed foods. Some efforts try to define UPFs by their ingredients – sponsors of some of the state laws banning certain ingredients (see our current feature on that) say what they’re really trying to ban are ultraprocessed foods. Other critics look at the processing steps involved.
“Attempting to classify foods as unhealthy simply because they are processed, or demonizing food by ignoring its full nutrient content, misleads consumers and exacerbates health disparities,” says Sarah Gallo, senior vice president of product policy and federal affairs at Consumer Brands Assn., the industry’ main lobbying group.
Not every shopper is aware of the issue yet, but their numbers are growing. The biggest fear for food & beverage processors is regulation, but even processors may prefer a single federal rule rather than 50 different state laws.
As much as processors fear labeling, that may exonerate some nutritious foods that are currently being called ultraprocessed – things like yogurt, enriched bread and nondairy “milks.” The first step will be reaching an enforceable definition; the 2009 Nova Classification System is a starting point but it has many faults.
Health & Human Services, FDA and USDA jointly issued a request for information last July to gather comments toward establishing a uniform definition for ultraprocessed foods, but they haven’t reported those results yet. One way or another, this issue likely will come to a head in some way this year.
The UPF outcome may follow that of GMOs. Genetically engineered ingredients caused such a fuss in the 2010s. There were protest marches and ballot initiatives. States started mandating their labeling. Then the feds stepped in, pre-emptively mandated a small label statement that the industry accepted and most consumers now overlook. And within a year or so, this issue disappeared.
GLP-1s
GLP-1 (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist) medications, such as Wegovy, Ozempic and others, succeed in weight loss by suppressing appetite and changing eating behaviors. Like all drugs, they have side-effects, and one directly relates to food and nutrition: “Because they’re eating and drinking less, users run the risk of dehydration, malnutrition, muscle loss and weaker bones,” says research funded by Tate & Lyle.
The painful side effect for food & beverage processors is lower sales, especially of snacks and “junk” foods. Think chips and savory snacks, sweet bakery items, frozen meals and side dishes, soft drinks and pizza.
“GLP-1s are, as we predicted, increasingly important because [Food Processing] readers cannot forecast sales and production if they don't understand the incredibly robust adoption rate of GLP-1s,” says Gary Stibel, founder and CEO of The New England Consulting Group.
The late-2025 report from Tate & Lyle notes an estimated 15 million Americans say they’ve “ever” used these medications, and use is expected to double over the next decade, with one in nine U.S. adults expected to use GLP-1 medications by 2035.
“Sales in certain categories are declining or at risk as GLP-1 users shift toward smaller portions, functional ingredients and guilt-free satisfaction,” the report says. But it also notes prospects: “For manufacturers, GLP-1 has created exciting opportunities, driven by a greater interest in healthier formulations and choices that support users.”
In most cases, the solution for food manufacturers means less sugar, fat and carbohydrates – already a recipe for many reformulations over recent decades – and more protein and fiber. And, generally, packing more nutrition into smaller or fewer portions.
What’s MAHA's next target?
When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. rose in pre-election polls and then in President Trump’s inner circle, much of his support base was the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, which he helped create. So it was no surprise that base continued to influence him as secretary of Health & Human Services Dept.
In February 2025, President Trump established the MAHA Commission, chaired by Kennedy. “Cleaning up” America’s food supply, especially of those synthetic colors, was in the crosshairs from the start. Last April, Kennedy sidestepped the cumbersome regulatory route by making a strong and public demand that processors remove six petroleum-based color additives (Blue 1&2, Green 1, Red 40 and Yellow 5&6) by the end of 2026. Despite initial resistance, food & beverage processors fell in line.
But what MAHA-inspired targets are next?
There were two MAHA Reports published last year. The initial one, in May, just laid out the movement’s primary concern: overweight children with chronic diseases, most often caused by less physical activity, ultraprocessed foods and “toxic chemicals” in foods and the environment.
The September MAHA Report, just 19 pages long (compared to the 73-page May report), was lighter on criticisms and even more so on solutions. It did promise, “HHS will undergo comprehensive reorganization to create the AHA [Administration for a Healthy America], a new agency structure specifically designed to coordinate and lead the federal government’s response to the chronic disease crisis through integrated prevention-focused programs and streamlined accountability for related programs.”
We asked HHS the status of that “Administration for a Healthy America,” but haven’t heard back.
“MAHA Moms” were on stage for some of Kennedy’s early news conferences, but the group hasn’t been mentioned in an official, governmental capacity since. However, there is a MAHA landing page on the HHS website.
What’s next from MAHA is not clear. They champion raw milk and whole milk in schools, shun vaccines and fluoride in drinking water and want an overhaul of allowed pesticides and other environmental chemicals. In terms of food, with the removal of synthetic colors underway, their focus has turned to ultraprocessed foods. They’re rumored to have a hand influencing the overdue 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. [Which, BTW, have since been published.]
“As Secretary Kennedy and the Trump administration pursue the Make America Healthy Again agenda, we anticipate regulatory activities also focused on safety and transparency,” says Consumer Brands’ Gallo. “Consumer Brands will continue to champion a robust, risk and science-based system that is relevant to human health.
“Specifically, we are preparing for regulatory dockets on both the Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) pathway and front-of-pack nutrition labeling,” she continues. “GRAS reform, especially, presents an opportunity to modernize FDA’s Office of Chemical Safety and provide greater transparency for consumers.”
In an interesting bit of intrigue, U.S. soft drink and snack food makers – some from the newly created Americans for Ingredient Transparency lobbying group – are reported to be employing a network of Republican pollsters, strategists and political financiers to pit MAGA against MAHA – pointing out the conflicting aims of President Trump’s pro-business Make American Great Again campaign with the anti-business rhetoric of the MAHA effort, according to an investigation by the British newspaper The Guardian and environmental watchdog Fieldnotes.
Is food & bev a healthy business?
Every year brings some comings and goings among the bigger food & beverage companies. Last year, mergers & acquisitions activity seemed to highlight not so much opportunity for the acquirer but weakness in the company being acquired. In several high-profile cases, companies had gotten so big and diverse, usually from past acquisitions, they are splitting in half.
The biggest deal, although it was begun in 2024, will rewrite the snack food landscape as well as one of the world’s largest family-held companies. After 17 months of antitrust review, mostly in Europe, Mars in December was allowed to complete its acquisition of Kellanova for $36 billion. Despite being the higher-potential, snack-oriented and global half of the former Kellogg Co., Kellanova had difficulty performing since it split from Kellogg.
The other half of Kellogg, cereal-only/domestic-only company WK Kellogg Co, had an even tougher time on its own and was bought in 2024 by European confectioner Ferrero Group for $3.1 billion.
Perhaps following the Kellogg-split playbook from 2023, “demerging” was a theme in 2025. Unilever, which has struggled with its size and diverse holdings, in December was able to complete the separation of its ice cream business, including Ben & Jerry’s, into Magnum Ice Cream Co. Nestle had done much the same with its ice cream business in 2020.
A bigger and more complex deal is just getting started. In August Keurig Dr Pepper said it would acquire European coffee powerhouse JDE Peet’s for $18.4 billion and then separate into two publicly held companies. KDP’s Keurig business would be spun off into a new, global coffee company while the rest of the company continues its focus on domestic soft drinks.
Similarly, after years of lackluster performance, Kraft Heinz announced in September it would split into a mostly condiments company (with billion-dollar brands Heinz, Philadelphia and Kraft Mac & Cheese) and a general grocery company (with billion-dollar brands Oscar Mayer, Kraft Singles and Lunchables). That should happen before the end of this year.
There are other signs that bigger isn’t always better and that food & beverage is not the moneymaker it was. General Mills became North America’s biggest yogurt maker after buying the rights to Yoplait in 2011. But that came to an end when Big G sold the business last July to French dairy Lactalis.
Hormel had big plans for Justin’s nut butters when it acquired the business in 2016; near the end of last year, Hormel sold 51% to a private investment firm. B&G Foods has sold off the Green Giant vegetables business that it bought for $765 million from General Mills in 2015.
After years of trying to trim and refocus itself, TreeHouse Foods is being taken private by European investment firm Industrial F&B Investments for $2.9 billion. Hearthside Food Solutions, the country’s largest contract manufacturer, emerged from bankruptcy in March with a new name, Maker’s Pride LLC, $2 billion of eliminated debt and an infusion of new capital.
J.M. Smucker is still trying to make its 2023 Hostess acquisition profitable.
Circana in December lowered its retail food & beverage sales outlook for 2026. The market data firm is now forecasting dollar sales growth for the industry to be in a range of 2-4% next year, down from the 3-5% range it predicted in August.
Throughout 2025, as we reported the quarterly financial reports of the bigger food & beverage companies, it was apparent many were struggling. Tariffs were often cited, but many firms also were dealing with volume declines, largely offset by and caused by increased prices. Keeping a lid on price increases and bringing back volumes are the goals of most companies for this year.
About the Author
Dave Fusaro
Editor in Chief
Dave Fusaro has served as editor in chief of Food Processing magazine since 2003. Dave has 30 years experience in food & beverage industry journalism and has won several national ASBPE writing awards for his Food Processing stories. Dave has been interviewed on CNN, quoted in national newspapers and he authored a 200-page market research report on the milk industry. Formerly an award-winning newspaper reporter who specialized in business writing, he holds a BA in journalism from Marquette University. Prior to joining Food Processing, Dave was Editor-In-Chief of Dairy Foods and was Managing Editor of Prepared Foods.