February 3, 2026
Snacklash: Cheetos vs Cigarettes
Ultra-processed foods should be treated more like cigarettes than food – study
Internet erupts: warning labels, snack bans, and 'Impossible ≠ Marlboro'
TLDR: A new study argues ultra‑processed foods are engineered like cigarettes and need tobacco‑style regulation. Commenters clashed: some say “UPF” is fuzzy, others want warning labels for hyper‑palatable snacks, and a loud chorus insists Impossible Burgers aren’t Marlboros—fueling a spicy debate about science, labels, and our shopping carts.
Are Doritos the new Marlboros? A new report says ultra‑processed foods (UPFs) are engineered to hook us—like cigarettes—and should face tobacco‑style rules. Think sodas, packaged snacks, fast food, and even many cereals. Researchers argue “health‑washing” labels like “low fat” and “sugar free” feel like those old “safer” cigarette filters—nice marketing, little real benefit. They warn: food is essential, but the modern food environment makes opting out nearly impossible.
Cue the snacklash. Skeptics like IcyWindows fired back: UPF “isn’t a scientific concept,” more vibe than science. Whole Foods defenders piled on, with bcatanzaro joking that calling an Impossible Burger a cigarette is a stretch: “Impossible ≠ Marlboro.” Others took the middle road—46493168 compared UPF to BMI (a height‑weight index): imperfect, but useful as a first warning. BirAdam wants at least warning labels when engineers tune sugar, salt, and crunch to keep you munching. And drecked called for ditching the controversial NOVA classification system (the popular way to sort food by processing levels), pushing “hyper‑palatability” as a better target.
Meanwhile, comment memes rolled: skull‑and‑crossbones cereal boxes, Surgeon General warnings on doughnuts, and “snack taxes.” The thread turned into a showdown between “it’s junk science,” “give people a heads‑up,” and “regulate the flavor‑hackers.” Pass the popcorn—uh, is popcorn UPF?
Key Points
- •A report by researchers from Harvard, the University of Michigan, and Duke compares ultra-processed foods (UPFs) to cigarettes and calls for tighter regulation.
- •UPFs are industrially manufactured products with additives (e.g., emulsifiers, artificial colours/flavours) and include items like soft drinks, packaged snacks, fast food, and ready meals.
- •The paper argues UPFs are engineered to encourage addiction by optimizing product “dose” and rapid activation of reward pathways, similar to tobacco.
- •Marketing claims such as “low fat” or “sugar free” are described as “health washing,” likened to ineffective marketing of cigarette filters in the 1950s.
- •UPFs are associated with higher salt/sugar/fat and additives linked to obesity, cancer, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and lower levels of essential nutrients; potential gut microbiota impacts are noted.