New Delhi: Scientists from the University of Michigan, Harvard University and Duke University have suggested that many ultraprocessed foods, including packaged snacks, soft drinks, ready-to-eat-meals and many fast foods are not just simply junk food or bad nutritional choices, they are industrially engineered products designed to keep consumers coming back for more, similar to strategies once used to sell cigarettes. These apply to chips, energy drinks, pizzas, burgers or tacos that seem impossible to resist. A paper describing the research has been published in The Milbank Quarterly, and draws on addiction science, nutrition research, and the history of tobacco regulation. The researchers found striking similarities between ultraprocessed foods and tobacco products.
Both the foods and tobacco were formulated to amplify reward in the brain, encourage habitual use, and shape public perception in ways that protect the profits. The reframing matters for young adults navigating food environments with cheap, hyperpalatable, always-available options. For decades, public health messaging has emphasised personal responsibility, making better choices, trying harder and having more self-control. The researchers argue that it is time to shift focus, and examine the larger systems that shape what is on shelves, what is available, and what is heavily marketed. Just as tobacco regulation moved from blaming smokers to holding companies accountable, the researchers suggest that food policy may require a similar evolution.
Moderation may be difficult by design
The researchers are not just saying that eating is the same as smoking, just that the foods may be designed in a way that makes moderation difficult. For an entire generation exposed to brightly packaged snacks, convenient food available in fast-food joints, and 24×7 delivery apps, the question may be bigger than diet trends or personal discipline. There is a need to understand who benefits the most by making foods irresistible, and turning ‘one more bite’ into a habit. According to the researchers, this conversation has to move beyond blame, towards accountability.