Nestlé confronts accusations of adding sugar to baby cereals sold across Africa while marketing sugar-free versions in Europe, following an investigation published by Swiss watchdog Public Eye on 18 November 2025. The multinational company strongly disputes the findings, setting up a confrontation with health advocates across the continent.
Laboratory analysis commissioned by Public Eye found that approximately 90 percent of Cerelac infant cereals tested from 20 African countries contained added sugar, averaging nearly six grams per serving. The investigation alleges this practice violates World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines warning against added sugars for children under three years, citing risks of obesity, dental problems and lasting preference for sweet foods.
The highest quantity detected was 7.5 grams per serving, nearly two sugar cubes, in a Cerelac product sold in Kenya for babies as young as six months. Products containing at least seven grams of added sugar per serving were found in seven African countries. By contrast, Cerelac sold in Switzerland, Germany and the United Kingdom contains no added sugar for babies from six months onwards.
A coalition of 19 Africa based civil society organizations wrote to Nestlé CEO Philipp Navratil, accusing the company of operating with double standards and demanding immediate withdrawal of sugary Cerelac from African markets. The letter argued that if added sugar proves unsuitable for Swiss and European children, it cannot be suitable for African children. All babies deserve equal rights to healthy nutrition regardless of nationality or skin color, according to the statement.
Nestlé rejected the allegations decisively. A spokesperson told Al Jazeera that the report contains misleading and unfounded allegations, stating the company does not operate with double standards and maintains a consistent approach to nutrition across all countries. The company emphasized its commitment to children’s wellbeing everywhere in the world, treating all children equally irrespective of location.
Nestlé argues that if sugars from ingredients such as milk, cereals and fruits are excluded, Cerelac infant cereals do not contain the reported levels of added refined sugars. The spokesperson said describing sugars from cereals and naturally present in fruits as refined sugars added to products is misleading and scientifically inaccurate.
Public Eye obtained nearly 100 Cerelac products from 20 African countries through partner civil society organizations and sent samples to Inovalys, a reference laboratory specializing in the agri-food sector. The testing methodology focused specifically on added sucrose and honey, excluding naturally occurring sugars from cereals and fruit ingredients.
The revelations arrive during a critical period for African health systems. WHO figures indicate the number of overweight children under five has almost doubled since 1990, leaving countries battling both undernutrition and excess weight simultaneously. Public health experts warn that introducing babies to sugar during infancy helps fuel this crisis by establishing early taste preferences.
Cerelac represents the most popular baby cereal brand on the African continent, with annual sales exceeding 250 million US dollars and Nestlé controlling over 50 percent of the market, according to exclusive data from Euromonitor, a food industry research company. The market dominance gives the product significant influence over infant nutrition patterns across the region.
Lori Lake from the University of Cape Town said these practices speak to a long history of colonialism, exploitation and racism, adding that Nestlé appears to be knowingly fueling the fire of obesity and diet-related diseases in Africa. Her comments reflect widespread frustration among African health professionals and researchers over multinational companies’ differing standards between wealthy and developing markets.
Field research conducted by Public Eye in South Africa’s Eastern Cape province, among the country’s poorest regions, revealed mothers spending substantial portions of limited income on Nestlé baby foods. Researchers found that in rural Eastern Cape areas, baby cereals are often mixed with infant formula, which can lead to malnutrition since babies under six months should receive only breast milk or specialized baby formula.
A 2018 study found that 80 percent of babies in Gintyintsimbi, a village in rural Eastern Cape, were bottle-fed with formula by their third month, and nine out of ten infants received a mixture of formula and cereal within their first six months. Families believe the mixture keeps babies full and helps them gain weight, with feeding this combination seen as a sign of good mothering. Status has become attached to providing this expensive mixture.
Nosihle Zingani, a public health researcher with over ten years’ experience as a clinical dietician in rural areas, noted cases of malnutrition in local hospitals where babies fed only with formula and cereal mixtures failed to receive adequate nutrition. The practice proves especially dangerous in areas lacking clean water access needed for safe formula preparation.
Public Eye found that actual sugar content in South African Cerelac exceeded amounts declared on package labels. The investigation also documented Cerelac being marketed to South African mothers as a healthy and nutritious option, with Nestlé contracting media influencers including athletics star Caster Semenya to promote the product.
The analysis found Cerelac products sold in Burundi contained the highest average level of added sugar at 7.3 grams per serving, while those in South Africa contained the lowest average at 3.6 grams. The variation suggests different formulations across African markets rather than a uniform product line.
Most products without added sugar found in Africa were not intended by Nestlé for the African market but imported from Europe by other actors. Nestlé has introduced two new sugar free variants in South Africa, but these represent recent additions rather than comprehensive product reformulation.
Regulations in Africa, Switzerland and the European Union are basically the same, based on Codex Alimentarius standards that allow up to 30 percent added sugar in baby cereals, according to Public Eye investigator Laurent Gabarell. He noted that while Nestlé is legally permitted to add sugar in Europe, the company chose to remove it, likely recognizing that European consumers reject added sugar in baby foods.
Petronell Kruger of the Healthy Living Alliance says Codex has been vulnerable to industry lobbying, while Patti Rundall, policy director at the International Baby Food Action Network, says a baby food industry lobby group shut down criticism of high sugar content in baby cereals during a 2024 meeting of the labelling committee.
The company stated it offers both sugar free and sweetened variants worldwide at similar price points in Africa and Europe. Nestlé said it aims to introduce variants with no added sugars to all markets where it operates by the end of 2025. The company emphasized adherence to national legislation and internal guidelines setting sugar thresholds well below international standards.
This investigation follows Public Eye’s initial revelations in 2024 highlighting what the organization called scandalous double standards in Nestlé’s baby food products. That earlier report examined products sold in Asia and Latin America, finding added sugar levels averaging four grams per serving. The African findings show quantities 50 percent higher than those detected in the earlier investigation.
India’s market responded dramatically to the 2024 revelations. Following Public Eye’s initial report, Nestlé announced introduction of 14 new Cerelac variants with no added sugar in India, where the scandal caused a drop in the company’s share price. The swift action in India contrasts with slower response in African markets despite similar health concerns.
The WHO maintains that early sugar exposure creates lasting preference for sugary foods and represents a major risk factor for obesity, which continues increasing across Africa. Childhood obesity rates have climbed steadily even as many African countries simultaneously struggle with undernutrition, creating what health experts call a dual burden of malnutrition.
Susan Goldstein, a public health academic, warns that early sugar exposure predisposes children to obesity and chronic illnesses later in life. Critics condemn what they characterize as Nestlé’s misleading marketing practices, accusing the company of exploiting urgent nutritional needs for profit while perpetuating health disparities between wealthy and poor countries.
The civil society coalition’s letter concluded bluntly that by adding sugar to infant cereals, Nestlé deliberately puts the health of African babies at risk for profit. The organizations demanded immediate cessation of these practices, warning that the world is watching the company’s response.
Nestlé stated that sugar content declared on product packaging is based on rigorous assessments including reliable analytical methods by certified laboratories. The company requested further details about Public Eye’s product analysis and methodologies but had not received these at the time of the controversy.
A petition launched in 2024 criticizing Nestlé’s baby food practices already collected more than 100,000 signatures. The growing public pressure, combined with civil society advocacy and potential regulatory changes, may force faster action from the company than initially planned.
African regulators may tighten sugar rules as WHO recommendations and civil society pressure gain influence. Observers indicate they will monitor Nestlé’s commitments closely, particularly its pledge to roll out sugar free products globally by the end of 2025. Whether the company follows through with comprehensive reformulation across all African markets remains to be seen.
The controversy touches on broader questions about multinational corporations’ responsibility to maintain consistent standards across markets regardless of local regulatory requirements. While Nestlé legally complies with African regulations permitting added sugars in baby food, critics argue that choosing to exceed WHO health recommendations in poorer countries while adhering to stricter standards in wealthy nations constitutes unethical business practice.
Health advocates emphasize that babies’ nutritional needs and vulnerability to harm remain identical regardless of geography. The debate ultimately centers on whether profit maximization justifies different product formulations when a company possesses the capability and knowledge to produce healthier alternatives, as demonstrated by its European product lines.
