Reading view

How Big Tobacco Influenced the Development of Ultra-Processed Foods

A groundbreaking study from the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) has revealed the hidden scientific and industrial strategies employed by Philip Morris Companies Inc. in the creation and marketing of Lunchables, turning what seemed to be a simple children’s convenience food into one of America’s most pervasive ultra-processed food products. This research uncovers how advanced cigarette research, flavor chemistry, and behavioral science were ingeniously adapted to the food industry, reshaping children’s eating habits and fueling public health challenges.

When Philip Morris acquired General Foods in 1985, it gained ownership not just of an existing food company but of an innovative product still in development: Lunchables. This acquisition marked a critical convergence of tobacco industry expertise with food product innovation. The UCSF study, recently published in the American Journal of Public Health, provides the first comprehensive analysis of how this meld of industries engineered ultra-processed foods by applying decades of tobacco research to optimize flavor, texture, and consumer appeal, especially targeting children.

Ultra-processed foods have become a dominant force in the American food landscape, making up nearly two-thirds of caloric intake among U.S. children. These foods are characterized not by their natural ingredients but by complex formulations containing artificial additives and flavor enhancers. Clinical trials consistently demonstrate that such products promote overeating and contribute directly to the rising epidemics of childhood obesity, type 2 diabetes, and metabolic liver diseases. This study thus places Philip Morris’s strategies at the center of an industrial transformation that has long-term public health implications.

Delving into corporate archival documents, including memos and internal strategic reports released during legal processes, the research reveals how tobacco companies like Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds deliberately ventured into the food industry in the 1980s. These companies owned major food brands such as Nabisco and Del Monte, and their entry into the food sector was not accidental but a carefully crafted business strategy designed to leverage synergies between tobacco and food product development.

Philip Morris’s merger with Kraft General Foods created North America’s largest food conglomerate, facilitating the transfer of proprietary knowledge and experimental techniques developed for cigarette design into food product engineering. This integration allowed for cross-division innovation, particularly in flavor chemistry and packaging technology, maximizing commercial returns by optimizing production efficiency while manipulating sensory experiences in ways that deepen consumer engagement and loyalty—particularly among young consumers.

A key element of the strategy was the concept of “technical synergies.” By adapting shelf-stable packaging technologies originally perfected for tobacco products, the company was able to develop innovative “grab-and-go” meal kits that preserved flavor and texture while appealing immensely to children’s preferences and parental desires for convenience. This packaging also extended product shelf life, thereby reducing costs and enabling rapid nationwide distribution.

Lunchables were particularly designed to tap into children’s behavioral and psychological drives. The product’s segmented packaging encouraged children to interact with their meal—essentially “playing” with food by assembling it according to their preferences—thereby fostering a sense of independence and control. Through vivid branding and familiar processed ingredients, such as Oscar Mayer meats and Kraft cheeses, the product also assuaged parental concerns while embedding itself as a staple in children’s diets across the country.

Intriguingly, when Philip Morris sought to introduce low-fat versions of Lunchables, they adapted neuroscience and behavioral testing techniques originally developed for nicotine research. Tobacco experts well-versed in the neural pathways of flavor perception applied electroencephalography (EEG) and sophisticated sensory tests to optimize the palatability of artificial fats and flavor additives without compromising taste. This crossover exemplifies the complex technological and scientific exchanges that fueled the surging growth of ultra-processed foods.

Laura Schmidt, PhD, the lead author of this study and a professor of medicine at UCSF, explicates that the fundamental difference between ultra-processed and minimally processed foods lies in these additives and flavor engineering technologies. The intricate manipulation of taste and sensory appeal using cigarette technology, she explains, was crucial in creating food products that go beyond mere sustenance to tap into deep neurobehavioral motivators shaping consumer choices—especially in children.

This research was facilitated by the accessibility of Philip Morris’s internal documents housed in the UCSF Industry Documents Library, which offers an unprecedented archive of millions of records across multiple sectors including tobacco, food, chemicals, and fossil fuels. Availability of these records has enabled researchers to reconstruct the corporate strategies behind the rise of ultra-processed foods and their lasting influence on public health.

Facing a wave of litigation and strengthening regulations during the 2000s, tobacco companies gradually divested from their food sector holdings by 2007, refocusing on their core business of cigarette manufacturing. Nevertheless, the ultra-processed food industry, once catalyzed by these tobacco conglomerates, continued its rapid expansion throughout the 21st century, perpetuating a cycle of public health concerns tied to diet-related diseases.

The UCSF study highlights an urgent need to consider the historical and industrial origins of ultra-processed foods when devising public health policies aimed at curbing the rising rates of obesity and metabolic disorders among children. Understanding that these products were engineered with sophisticated neurobehavioral insights borrowed from tobacco science underscores the challenge of addressing their pervasive role in contemporary diets.

By revealing how tobacco companies’ scientific expertise was redirected to engineer enticing food products for children, this research uncovers the hidden industrial forces that have shaped modern American dietary patterns, emphasizing the critical intersection of corporate strategy, neuroscience, and public health.

Subject of Research: Scientific and industrial strategies of tobacco companies applied to ultra-processed food product design, particularly focusing on Lunchables and associated public health impacts.

Article Title: Tobacco Science and Flavor Engineering: How Philip Morris Designed Lunchables to Maximize Children’s Appeal

News Publication Date: June 3, 2026

Web References:
– American Journal of Public Health Article: https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/epdf/10.2105/AJPH.2026.308491
– UCSF Industry Documents Library: https://www.industrydocuments.ucsf.edu/food/

References: Internal corporate documents from Philip Morris Companies Inc., legal discovery archives, and neuroscience studies on flavor perception.

Image Credits: Not available

Keywords
Tobacco, Behavioral neuroscience, Social neuroscience, Obesity, Childhood obesity, Children, Type 2 diabetes, Diabetes, Fatty liver disease, Weight gain, Brain

  •  

EU sets out plans to reduce reliance on US cloud providers

The European Union has now published a set of measures aimed at boosting Europe’s tech industry to help reduce reliance on US and Chinese suppliers for AI, cloud, and semiconductors. The proposals include rules to restrict the use of US hyperscalers for certain public sector procurement purposes, but stop short of banning them outright.

“Technological sovereignty does not mean protectionism. Europe remains grounded in openness, partnership, and fair competition,” Henna Virkkunen, executive vice president for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, said in a statement Wednesday. “At the same time, Europe wants to be in the position to make its own choices, avoiding dependence on single dominant suppliers, especially from non-like-minded countries.”

The European Technological Sovereignty Package — released after several delays — includes two legislative proposals: the Cloud and AI Development Act and Chips Act (CAIDA) 2.0 and the Open Source Strategy and Strategic Roadmap for Digitalization and AI in Energy.

CAIDA aims to triple data center capacity in the next five to seven years by easing restrictions for deployments across the EU. It also includes rules that, if enacted, would require EU public bodies to meet certain sovereignty criteria for cloud service procurement related to certain sensitive workloads.

Amid ongoing trans-Atlantic tensions and a long-time deep reliance on US tech providers, European organizations have become increasingly wary of a “kill switch” that would cut off access to digital services. There are also concerns that US hyperscalers could be compelled to share data with US government under the CLOUD Act and Foreign Intelligence Services Act (FISA), even when data centers are located in Europe.

The CAIDA proposals include four levels of criteria for suppliers; the most basic includes data center infrastructure located and operated in the region – something  many US cloud suppliers already provide – with stricter rules around supplier ownership, full control over the software stack, and more stringent cybersecurity certification.

The majority of existing EU public sector workloads (70%) fall under the first level, with 20% at level 2, and 9% at level 3. Only a small proportion (1%) of the most sensitive workloads would require level 4.

Other proposals include the Chips Act 2.0, a follow-up to the 2023 legislation that sought to improve semiconductor production capabilities; the updated version now aims to boost research and spur demand for domestically produced processors. 

The legislative proposals must be negotiated by the European Parliament and Council of the European Union before adoption.

  •  

Mathematicians warn of AI threats to profession as industry encroaches

Mathematicians warned against rising tech industry influence in a declaration describing the many challenges that AI poses to mathematics research. The timing of the declaration comes two weeks after OpenAI publicized one of its AI models as having disproved an 80-year-old mathematical conjecture in geometry.

The declaration was developed by a working group of 16 researchers over eight months following a conference held at Leiden University in the Netherlands in September 2025. Published on June 2, 2026, the resulting Leiden Declaration on Artificial Intelligence and Mathematics has been endorsed by the International Mathematical Union—the international non-governmental organization that hosts conferences and oversees the most prestigious prizes in mathematics such as the Fields Medal.

“Mathematicians should find it quite striking that tech companies are suddenly interested in their work,” said Kevin Buzzard, a mathematician at Imperial College London, in a statement. “The Leiden Declaration is a well-thought-through response to what is currently happening, as AI continues to disrupt this space.”

Read full article

Comments

© Kenishirotie via iStock / Getty Images

  •  
❌