UPFs are foods that have been manufactured using a lot of artificial ingredients. Soda, chips and store-bought cookies all fall under the category of UPFs. Both UPFs and cigarettes are engineered to get a person hooked and want more.
Food companies optimize the “doses” of fat, salt, sugar and other ingredients to make sure the foods quickly activate the reward centers of the brain. And labeling a food as “low-fat” or “sugar-free” can often hide the fact that the food has increased another unhealthy ingredient to make it tastier. The practice is called health washing and is comparable to the advertising claims around cigarette filters in the 50s. UPFs and cigarettes are both linked to widespread health problems.
Much like cigarettes, UPFs can cause cravings. Ingredients are often used to make them more appealing while also less filling. They also cause blood sugar spikes followed by sharp drops that mimic nicotine withdrawal, making a person want more to “fix” the problem.
We all know tobacco isn’t necessary for staying alive, but food is, making it harder for consumers to immediately recognize the dangers of UPFs. Scientists want labeling on packages to clearly show consumers that not all foods are the same. Just the alcohol is clearly labeled as being different from other drinks; UPFs should be packaged differently from normal foodstuffs.
Researchers argue that UPFs meet all the requirements for being considered addictive and capable of driving compulsive use, as well as being known to cause health problems. Therefore, they say, there should be marketing restrictions, litigation and structural intervention against them. They argue that we need to stop treating overeating UPFs as an individual responsibility and hold the food industry accountable.
“Some ultra-processed foods have crossed a line,” study co-author and Univ. of Michigan Prof. Ashley Gearhardt. “Products like soda, sweets and fast food are engineered less like food and more like cigarettes — optimized for craving, rapid intake and repeated use. That level of harm demands regulatory action aimed at industry design and marketing, not individual willpower.”
Thankfully, if we look at history, cigarettes can give us a guide on what we should do next. “Tobacco provides a warning, and tobacco control provides a source of hope,” wrote the researchers. “Similar to tobacco, voluntary reform of the industry will not be sufficient. Policies that confront [UPFs] with the same seriousness that once applied to tobacco, while actively promoting real food, offer the most promising path out of the current crisis.”
