Study: Ultra-Processed Foods as Addictive as Cigarettes

Ultra-Processed Foods: The New Tobacco?

A groundbreaking study published in the prestigious Milbank Quarterly journal has sent shockwaves through the nutrition and public health communities. Researchers from Harvard University, University of Michigan, and Duke University have concluded that ultra-processed foods share more similarities with cigarettes than with minimally processed fruits and vegetables. The study argues these industrially engineered food products deserve regulation proportionate to their significant public health risks.

The Addiction Connection

The research team found striking parallels between how tobacco companies and ultra-processed food manufacturers design their products. 'Both ultra-processed foods and cigarettes are engineered to stimulate consumption and addiction,' the researchers state in their paper. They point to similarities in production processes, the optimization of 'dosing' to activate the body's reward system, and the rapid delivery of addictive components.

Ultra-processed foods include products like soda, packaged snacks, instant noodles, frozen pizza, and ready-to-eat meals. According to the NOVA classification system, these are industrially manufactured foods containing additives like emulsifiers, artificial colors, and flavorings that make them hyper-palatable.

Expert Perspectives and Nuances

Not everyone is fully convinced by the comparison. Alie de Boer, Associate Professor of Nutrition and Food Information at Maastricht University, offers a more nuanced view. 'The term addiction is quite tricky,' she explains. 'With tobacco, we know clearly that nicotine is what makes it addictive. We can show exactly how that works in the brain. With food, it's more nuanced.'

De Boer acknowledges that food companies do create products people want to eat repeatedly, but questions whether they intentionally engineer addiction. 'We know different reward systems are activated in the brain, but how exactly that works is less understood,' she notes.

Marketing and 'Health Washing'

The study also warns about deceptive marketing practices. Researchers compare claims like 'low-fat' or 'sugar-free' on ultra-processed foods to cigarette filter advertising in the 1950s that suggested filters protected health. Clinical psychologist and co-author Ashley Gearhardt from the University of Michigan told The Guardian: 'We first blame the individual and say, "Oh, smoke in moderation, drink in moderation." Eventually we reach a point where we understand what tools the industry uses to create products that can truly addict people.'

De Boer acknowledges marketing plays a role, noting that European regulations focus on individual substances rather than overall product healthiness. 'If there's less sugar, you can say that, but little attention is paid to the whole context of the product,' she observes.

Call for Regulatory Action

The researchers advocate for stricter regulation of ultra-processed foods, suggesting lessons from successful tobacco control policies. They propose viewing these foods as addictive, industrially engineered substances rather than just food.

De Boer agrees some regulatory tightening could help but notes challenges. 'Ultra-processed food is such a broad category, a real container concept, that it's legally difficult to define,' she says. 'But being a bit stricter is certainly possible, for example by looking more critically at what marketing is allowed.'

She suggests better labeling for children, potential tax measures, and mandatory reductions in salt and sugar content. 'We see there are already initiatives for that,' she adds, 'but they go in slow steps.'

Health Implications

The debate comes amid growing evidence about ultra-processed foods' health impacts. A comprehensive Lancet review links these foods to obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and premature death. The American Heart Association's 2026 fact sheet calls for regulation to address these health risks.

As consumption of ultra-processed foods continues to rise globally—accounting for 58% of daily calories in the US and 57% in the UK—the call for regulatory action grows louder. Whether policymakers will treat these foods more like tobacco products remains to be seen, but the conversation has certainly been sharpened.

Sources

Milbank Quarterly Study, The Guardian Article, Lancet Review, Maastricht University Profile