Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are the main cause of death globally (70%) and in the Region of the Americas (80%), and poor diets are a leading driver of NCDs. In response, the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)/World Health Organization (WHO) introduced a set of evidence-based regulatory measures to help countries improve diets through the reduced consumption of processed and ultra-processed foods. This paper aims to describe the needs of and propose actions for key actors to advance these measures. A workshop was designed to assess member states’ regulatory capacity. A thematic analysis was conducted to analyze regional needs, successes and challenges. Thereafter, the Government Capacity-Building Framework for the prevention and control of NCDs was used to examine findings. The findings were organized in two sets: (i) PAHO/WHO actions to support member states and (ii) key actors’ actions to advance regulatory policies. The results show notable regulatory progress across the Region of the Americas. However, progress differs between countries, with opportunities to strengthen measures in most countries, mainly in conflict of interest management. The results identified important actions to strengthen the regulatory capacity of PAHO/WHO member states. To maximize momentum for these actions, timelines must be identified, and political commitment can be boosted by applying human rights-based and food system-wide approaches.

Bennett and colleagues’ paper aims to synthesize the existing frameworks to identify and monitor unhealthy commodity industry’s (UCI’s) influence on health "to create a template surveillance system to be used by national governments across industries." In this commentary, we argue that to achieve a robust government-led national surveillance system, some challenges should be considered, such as (a) addressing power asymmetries between government and UCIs involved in policy-making, (b) evaluating competing interests among government constituencies to achieve policy coherence around health issues, and (c) contemplate whether governments rely on private or corporate donors and partners that may threaten financing and operationalization of the surveillance. Suggestions on how to overcome these challenges are beyond the scope of this commentary, but we discuss some cases of bottom-up approaches from organized groups aiming to hold UCIs accountable. We consider them to be emerging effective ways to support government-led initiatives and counter the long-lasting corporate power and negative impacts on public health.