LATAM fortification strategies diverge from WHO recommendations
29 Apr 2026 | EAS Strategies
Eugenia Muinelo, manager of regulatory affairs Latin America at EAS Strategies, discusses how LATAM nations are tailoring food fortification for population-specific deficiencies. As a region that suffers from a “double burden” of obesity and micronutrient deficiencies, governments are taking steps to decouple vitamins and minerals from indulgent categories like confectionery and ice cream.
Latin America has been a global leader in food fortification, with mandatory programs targeting micronutrient deficiencies across staple foods like flour and salts.
But today, that landscape is becoming increasingly complex, marked by fragmented regulations, evolving public health priorities, and new policy tools like front of pack labeling.
To help us navigate this, I'm joined by Eugenia Mineo, Regulatory Affairs Manager for Latin America at EAS Strategies.
She is a longtime contributor to the world of food ingredients and the author of our recent article on fortification in the region.
Eugenia, great to have you with us.
Thank you, Missy.
Thank you for inviting me.
So, let's set the scene here first.
How have you seen fortification policy evolve over the past decade or so in Latin America?
And what are some of the key macro trends shaping that policy today?
Over the past decade, many countries have shifted towards reviewing effectiveness, evidence of persistent deficiencies, despite the mandatory fortification, monitoring compliance and informants of policies.
What we have seen is that in general terms, the automatic adoption of WHO recommendations have been replaced by a more country-specific approach.
And in the recent years, the focus has been more on restrictions to the voluntary fortification, for example, in many countries with mandatory front of pack labeling regulation.
This is because Latin America face a double burden, so there is a persistent micronutrient deficiencies, but also high rates of overweight, obesity, diabetes, and hypertension, known as non-communicable diseases.
So, this is really driving like greater reluctance to fortify specific food categories and preference for fortifying food products with high population reach.
OK, so that's interesting they're taking this, you know, they're diverging from the WHO.
Where does that fragmentation create the most practical challenges for food brands?
Yeah, one of the main challenges remains for the final product when the raw material needs to comply with the rules from a specific country.
So, for example, if you have a cookie that is made with, with flour, and that cookie is imported from Brazil to Uruguay, for example, that will need to comply with the fortification rules in Uruguay.
And the same case, if you import a product from Argentina to Brazil that contains wheat flour, it will need to comply with the Brazilian rules.
I, I'm bringing the example of these countries because they are all part of Mercosur trade bloc, so even though the trade bloc has harmonized regulations and pushes for reducing barriers to trade, still this lack of harmonization, with the dosages creates additional barriers that companies need to consider.
So, what do brands tend to do in that type of situation?
Are they developing different formulas?
There is like a general consensus to try to reach something to a, a level that could comply with all of them.
So yeah, at least in Mercosur, this is the situation, so they might have the same formulation, but trying to adapt the wheat flour, with the different combinations of, levels that are requested in each coun in each country.
So, in some countries, flu fluoride is in table salts, while in others, it's optional or absent.
So, what does that variation reveal about how fortification strategies are adapted to the national public health priorities and infrastructure in these different countries?
Yeah, exactly.
The variation, it really depends on each country's specific public health issue.
So, it reveals how a country could adapt the fortification policy to the specific needs and also considering the dietary patterns, see.
This is a very wide continent and although we both of us speak the same language, there are very, different dietary patterns and The type of foods that are being, mainly consumed in each country vary from one country to another.
So, this is why normally authorities are picking those food products that known that could be consumed for white population.
Mhm.
OK, because fluoride would typically be in water, like in the US, but then in some of these countries it's in the salts, so.
Yeah, but also you need to consider that not like the prices of having a bottled water might be different in each country and some countries actually you can drink water from the tap water, so it really depends from one country to another and actually what the governments can realistically manage, not only what's maybe science is recommending.
Yeah, makes sense.
So, so, at the same time, with all of this, thinking about, OK, infrastructure may be limited.
At the same time, Latin America is really leading the world in front of pack warning labels.
So, do these systems create a tension with fortification strategies, especially when a project can be both fortified, but then also flagged as too high in sugar, salt, or fat.
Yes, exactly, like front of pack labeling and fortification strategies do create a growing tension in the region, and it reflects more a deeper shift in how governments prioritize dietary patterns and disease prevention over like a single nutrient gains.
So, what the region is doing is not rejecting rejecting the fortification like outright, but kind of re-disciplining it, like, for example, you have a product which is carrying a front of pack labeling scheme, might face some restrictions for the use of nutrition claims.
For example, if you want to claim that your product is high in some nutrients, in the case of Chile and Mexico, then you cannot do it if the product bears the front of pack labeling scheme.
And this is also related with like school restrictions in many schools, if a product is appearing the front of pack labeling scheme, you are not allowed to commercialize that product in the school.
And then you have school feeding programs.
So those school, school feeding programs sometimes they need to be revised to avoid including that type of product, in their programs.
So, these are like two examples of how, both policies are really interconnected.
I saw in the article that also Argentina doesn't allow fortification in ice cream.
Right, and that really, that was such an interesting example because I can only imagine that they're trying to avoid the situation where then people are saying, this ice cream, it has iron, so it's great for you.
Is that, was that the intention behind that sort of law?
Yes, this is in the regulation, like there are some specific categories, mainly confectionery, and.
And sweets that cannot be fortified, and it's a way from the government to, like, just not to promote the consumption of those products, so you can fortify many other food categories.
That's so interesting because I do recall seeing that, I believe it was the, the fastest growing category for confectionery was, like, with supplements, you know, with vitamins and minerals, and that was becoming really popular, I think specifically in the Chinese market.
And so I, but I can definitely see that there's, sort of this dual feeling around it, you know, by OK, but do you want to promote the use of confectionery?
This is now like a permissible indulgence type of thing and in a, in a region where they're battling with all of these non-communicable diseases, then I can imagine that's, that's the route that they're taking.
It's exactly like each country is trying to adapt the rules to their really national needs.
So this is something that has been approved in Argentina like long back actually before all the front of back conversation started.
So, looking ahead, do you expect a greater alignment across Latin America or continued divergence, and what should companies prioritize when to stay compliant in this environment?
Mm, yeah, so far I think it is hard to think about harmonization of the fortification strategies for the reasons that we have previously discussed.
The variation shows that the fortification of Latin America has evolved from a technical prescription more to a contextual policy instrument.
And this shows that countries are actively like trying to balance the deficiency reduction with the obesity prevention and using also the fortification rules to reinforce but not to undermine like broader nutrition strategies.
So, in conclusion, like fortification policy is no longer about like whether to fortify but more like the what's, why, how, whom, like within each national context, so this is something that companies need to understand and also this is very related to what we mentioned about all those policies around non-communicable diseases.
Even though there is a harmonization, for example, for labeling, still there was no consensus for like the same approach around front of pack, for example, and it's the same case so far for fortification strategies.
Eugenia, thank you.
Really valuable insights into this evolving space.
Thank you so much, Missy.
This is Missy Green signing off.
