Two recent studies from the United States have found that the marketing strategies and product designs for ultra-processed foods (UPFs) share similarities with those used by the tobacco industry. The researchers argue that these tactics include targeting children with playful food designs and offering larger portion sizes to encourage overconsumption. According to the studies, tobacco companies invested heavily in the food sector for two decades, adopting established marketing strategies to promote UPFs and maximize profits.
Read More
Lead author of one of the studies, Dr. Tera Fazzino, an associate professor at the University of Kansas, explained that many major U.S. tobacco companies entered the food industry in the 1980s, controlling a significant portion of food sales until the mid-2000s. Research indicates that during this period, these companies frequently marketed hyper-palatable and ultra-processed food products.
The findings, published in the American Journal of Public Health, highlight how tobacco company practices were used to design food products. Dr. Fazzino noted that just as tobacco firms developed ‘king size’ cigarettes to encourage more frequent use, they applied similar concepts to food, creating ‘king size’ options to drive consumption.
Additionally, while promoting ‘light’ and ‘low tar’ cigarettes as healthier choices, these companies similarly marketed ‘light’ and reduced-fat food products to retain customers concerned about health issues. Dr. Laura Schmidt, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco, who published a related study in the same journal, reaffirmed that concepts from cigarette design were pivotal in creating UPFs.
The studies emphasize that marketing to children highlighted playful elements, techniques borrowed from tobacco advertising, such as using cartoon characters in promotions. This strategy involved incorporating artificial flavors and high levels of sugar, fat, and salt into foods designed specifically for children. Both Fazzino and Schmidt expressed concerns that the focus of these companies has historically been on business growth at the expense of public health. Fazzino noted that extensive consumer testing was conducted to enhance food appeal, which often contradicted nutritional value.
Fazzino and Schmidt argue that the tobacco-influenced marketing strategies have contributed to public health issues, including obesity and related chronic diseases. They referenced numerous studies linking UPF consumption to serious health consequences, such as diabetes and heart disease.
Experts have also pointed out that the aggressive advertising techniques originating from the tobacco industry have now been adapted for food marketing, particularly targeted at vulnerable populations, including children. Despite ongoing discussions about the health implications of processed foods, representatives from the International Food and Beverage Alliance have criticized comparisons between UPFs and tobacco, arguing that some UPFs provide important dietary benefits.
Looking ahead, Schmidt expressed concerns about whether healthy changes can be made in the current food environment, given the dominance of UPFs in many markets. Both researchers called for a shift towards supporting local agriculture and prioritizing public health over food industry profits. They contend that the influence of tobacco companies has left a lasting mark on the food industry, affecting the way products are designed and marketed globally.