Arecent investigation led by Swiss non-governmental organisation Public Eye, in collaboration with civil society organisations across 13 African countries, has raised concerns about the levels of added sugar found in Nestlé’s Cerelac infant cereal products marketed in African nations. The group claims that these products contain significantly more added sugar than their counterparts sold in Europe, reigniting debate over corporate nutritional equity and consumer protection in the Global South.
According to Public Eye, the study involved the laboratory analysis of nearly 100 Cerelac samples sourced from African countries including Nigeria, South Africa, and Morocco. Their findings suggest that over 90 percent of the sampled products contained added sugar, with an average serving containing approximately six grams. This is reported to be nearly double the amount found in comparable products sold in India, which has itself previously come under scrutiny for similar issues involving Nestlé’s infant cereals.
The claims are based on technical analysis conducted in partnership with local advocacy organisations and follow an earlier investigation published in April 2024. That report had revealed similar disparities in added sugar content between Nestlé products sold in India and those available in European markets. The 2024 report led to an inquiry by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India.
Nestlé has disputed the latest findings, describing them as both “misleading” and “scientifically inaccurate”. A spokesperson for the company stated that the report conflates sugars naturally present in ingredients such as milk, cereals, and fruits with refined sugars. Nestlé maintains that when naturally occurring sugars are excluded, their Cerelac range in Africa contains no added refined sugar at the levels alleged in the report.
The multinational further emphasised that all its infant cereals conform to the international standards set by Codex Alimentarius, a joint initiative by the Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization. These standards are widely recognised but not legally binding in all jurisdictions, and they often serve as the basis for national regulations.
In a joint open letter dated 17 November 2025, the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) and 19 African civil society groups appealed directly to Nestlé’s newly appointed CEO Philipp Navratil. The letter urged the company to cease what was described as “double standards” in its formulation of infant products distributed across African markets.
Nestlé responded by reiterating its global commitment to equal nutritional standards for all consumers, regardless of geography. It further noted that 97 percent of its markets already carry versions of Cerelac without added sugars and that it aims to reach full global rollout by the end of 2025.
This discourse emerges amid broader institutional transitions within Nestlé. The company is navigating a leadership change following the departure of former CEO Laurent Freixe. The current CEO Philipp Navratil inherits a complex organisational landscape characterised by calls for structural reform and product portfolio streamlining, as reported by Reuters.
The timing of the sugar controversy intersects with significant internal reforms. Nestlé announced in October 2025 that it plans to reduce its global workforce by approximately 16,000 roles over two years, part of a broader drive to save three billion Swiss francs through cost-efficiency and automation, as covered by Yahoo Finance.
Against this backdrop, the Public Eye report calls attention not only to the nutritional integrity of Nestlé’s infant products but also to the ethics of differentiated standards in global supply chains. The critique resonates strongly within a continent increasingly conscious of structural inequalities in trade, health, and corporate accountability.
The issue also invites a deeper interrogation of how multinational food companies formulate and distribute products based on assumptions about local market conditions, purchasing power, and regulatory oversight. These assumptions can contribute to divergent standards that may undermine long-term public health objectives in regions where institutional capacity for food safety monitoring remains under-resourced.
Advocates in Africa are not merely passive recipients of external investigations. Local researchers, health professionals, and watchdog groups are actively participating in the evidence-gathering process and shaping the discourse on food justice and consumer rights. Their collaborative efforts with international organisations such as IBFAN illustrate an emergent, assertive African agency pushing back against legacies of nutritional marginalisation.
In contrast to reductive portrayals that frame African countries as vulnerable or uninformed markets, the ongoing scrutiny of Nestlé’s products demonstrates a rising demand for transparency and alignment with global best practices — not as recipients of charity but as equal stakeholders in global commerce.
Nestlé’s stated goal to eliminate added sugars from all Cerelac products by the end of 2025 will likely be scrutinised closely in the months ahead. Whether the company can deliver on its commitments while maintaining trust across diverse markets remains to be seen.
What is clear is that the broader narrative is no longer shaped solely by corporate communications. The African public, through grassroots mobilisation and scientific inquiry, is redefining the contours of accountability and rights in consumer health.
