Study: Tobacco Companies Transferred Addiction Engineering Into Ultra-Processed Foods

New research published in the American Journal of Public Health argues that techniques developed to make cigarettes addictive were later applied to ultra-processed foods when tobacco companies bought major food brands in the 1980s. The authors say these tactics contributed to the rise of hyper-palatable packaged foods that now make up a large share of the American diet and are tied to chronic health harms.

What Researchers Found

After reviewing tobacco industry archives, University of California, San Francisco professor Laura Schmidt concluded that cigarette makers carried product-development and marketing playbooks from tobacco into food when they acquired brands such as Kraft General Foods (then owned by Philip Morris) and Nabisco (then owned by R.J. Reynolds).

"The very technologies that were used to figure out how to optimize the addictive properties of nicotine using added sugar and artificial flavorings — that core technology was transferred from the tobacco industry to ultra-processed food development," said Schmidt.

Researchers describe many ultra-processed foods as "hyper-palatable": engineered combinations of fat, sugar, salt and refined starches designed to strongly stimulate the brain's reward pathways. The journal section also highlights parallels in marketing, such as upsized portions and the creation of "light" or reduced options intended to reassure health-conscious consumers while keeping them loyal to brands.

Health Links and Evidence

Studies in the special AJPH section associate high consumption of ultra-processed foods with chronic disease. One cohort paper tracked more than 5,000 older adults for a decade and reported a possible link between greater intake of ultra-processed foods and increased odds of cognitive impairment and dementia.

Nicholas Chartres, an associate editor of the journal and co-author of the collection, said the work "adds to a growing body of evidence that these products are associated with chronic disease, that they have addictive characteristics, and that they were also intentionally developed by tobacco and food companies."

Policy, Public Opinion, and Industry Response

The authors argue several tobacco-fighting strategies could be adapted to ultra-processed foods — including tighter regulation, litigation, and stronger consumer protections. A survey included in the journal section found most of 2,000 adults polled, across party lines, supported government regulation of ultra-processed foods.

Some U.S. states have already taken preliminary steps such as moves to restrict certain synthetic food dyes. Legal experts say state attorneys general might eventually pursue tobacco-style lawsuits against food companies for public-health harms.

Packaged-food industry groups responded that their products are safe and affordable. Researchers counter that convenience does not justify decades of formulation and marketing aimed at increasing consumption. The discussion also calls attention to environmental issues: companies behind many processed items, including Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Danone, are among the world's largest contributors to plastic pollution.

"It feels like we've reached a tipping point between the strength of the science, public support, and then also political will," said co-author Lindsey Smith Taillie. Public health lawyer Jennifer Pomeranz added: "The last time there was this kind of universal upheaval about the safety of our food supply was the 1906 [Pure] Food and Drug Act."

The AJPH collection does not claim every processed product is equivalent to cigarettes, but it urges policymakers, public-health advocates and consumers to recognize the deliberate role of industry engineering and marketing in driving consumption and related health harms.