Ultra-processed foods share more characteristics with cigarettes than with fruit and vegetables: according to researchers, regulating them like tobacco would reduce public health risks. Ultra-processed foods share more characteristics with cigarettes than with fruit and vegetables: according to researchers, regulating them like tobacco would reduce public health risks.
Ultra-processed foods should be regulated more like cigarettes than like food: this is the conclusion of a study conducted by researchers from the University of Michigan, Duke University and Harvard University, published in early February in the health journal Milbank Quarterly.
This is a review that synthesised findings from addiction science, nutrition and public health history to identify the structural and sensory characteristics that increase the reinforcing potential — that is, the capacity of a stimulus to increase the likelihood that a given behaviour will be repeated in the future — of both cigarettes and ultra-processed foods.
"Many ultra-processed foods share more characteristics with cigarettes than with minimally processed fruit or vegetables, and therefore warrant regulation commensurate with the significant public health risks they represent," the scientists concluded.
Ultra-processed foods are those that undergo extensive industrial transformation; they contain various additives such as colourings and preservatives, high quantities of sugar, salt and fat, and are often high in calories but low in nutrients. Examples include packaged snacks, sugary drinks, ready meals, as well as packaged sliced bread and glazed breakfast cereals.
The study explains how cigarettes and ultra-processed foods are not simply natural products, but highly engineered delivery systems, specifically designed to create addiction and drive consumption. The tobacco industry and the ultra-processed food industry have used similar strategies to increase product appeal, evade regulation and shape public perception: these include dosage optimisation, the addition of additives, the speed of gratification and reward for the body, and "healthwashing": slogans such as "low fat" or "sugar free" have been likened to cigarette filter advertising in the 1950s — a strategy that in reality offers no significant health benefits.
As the researchers highlighted, these design features hijack human biology, undermine individual agency and contribute heavily to the costs of disease and healthcare. Ultra-processed foods are in fact associated with many of the same health risks as smoking, such as heart disease, cancer and premature death.
The authors therefore suggest evaluating ultra-processed foods not only through a nutritional lens, but also using the same criteria applied to the treatment and regulation of tobacco.
Marketing restrictions, improved labelling or structural interventions such as taxes or limits on availability in schools and hospitals could be useful, according to the study, in addressing the public health threat posed by ultra-processed foods, shifting efforts from individual responsibility to the accountability of the food industry.