Kroger is one of the country’s largest grocery operators, and store closures at that scale are closely watched across the food retail industry. On August 17, 2026, USA TODAY reported that Kroger is moving ahead with a plan to close 60 stores under several banners by the end of the year. The closures now stretch across 16 states, with confirmed shutdowns already reported in markets from Texas and Virginia to Wisconsin and Washington.

Kroger is moving ahead with a 60-store closure plan

Kroger is proceeding with a previously announced plan to shutter 60 stores in 2026, according to USA TODAY, which reported on August 17 that more than 35 locations had already closed. The report said the shutdowns span several Kroger-owned banners, including Kroger, Harris Teeter, Pick ‘n Save, Mariano’s, QFC, Fred Meyer, Fry’s Food and Drug, King Soopers, Jay C Food Stores and Food 4 Less.

The scale is broad but not systemwide. USA TODAY reported that Kroger still operates more than 2,700 stores nationwide, meaning the closures affect a relatively small share of its total footprint even as they touch multiple regions. The same report said the company first announced the 60-store plan last year and is continuing to execute it through the end of 2026.

Kroger told investors in its first-quarter 2025 news release that it expects “a modest financial benefit” from the closures. The company also stated that it will offer roles in other stores to all associates employed at affected locations. When contacted by USA TODAY for additional information, the company declined to provide more detail.

Confirmed closures span 16 states, but the full remaining list is not public

Confirmed closures reported by USA TODAY, drawing on analyses by Grocery Dive, Fast Company and MassLive, span Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. Specific cities identified in the report include Houston, McKinney and Spring in Texas; Arlington, McLean, Abingdon and Charlottesville in Virginia; Milwaukee, Glendale, Oak Creek and South Milwaukee in Wisconsin; and Tacoma and Mill Creek in Washington.

Other confirmed closures include Atlanta, Brookhaven, Decatur and Alpharetta in Georgia; Louisville, Kentucky; Bossier City, Louisiana; Kingsport, Tennessee; and Peoria, Illinois. In some cases, the report said stores were consolidated into larger nearby formats. In West Virginia, for example, closures in Dunbar and South Charleston were reported as consolidations into marketplace locations.

What is not yet public is the company’s full list of all remaining stores set to close before the end of 2026. USA TODAY reported that, based on Kroger’s original estimate and the closures already tracked publicly, just over 20 locations may still be left to shut. Kroger has not released a comprehensive state-by-state list of every remaining affected store.

The closures follow merger setbacks and a broader portfolio reshaping

The timing of the closures follows a period of major strategic change for Kroger. USA TODAY reported that the shutdowns come after multiple court rulings blocked Kroger’s proposed merger with Albertsons. That failed transaction had been one of the grocery industry’s biggest recent consolidation efforts, and its collapse left Kroger to refocus on its existing store base and longer-term portfolio decisions.

The same report said Kroger announced last month that it would acquire Giant Eagle for $1.65 billion. Taken together, the closure plan and the Giant Eagle deal point to a period of active reshaping rather than simple retrenchment. Kroger has not publicly tied each individual store closure to a single cause, but its investor statement did frame the move as one with expected financial benefit.

For customers, the most immediate impact remains local and uneven. Some communities have already lost stores, while others may still be waiting for confirmation on whether a nearby location is part of the remaining closure count. What Kroger has said publicly is that affected workers will be offered opportunities at other stores, and that the company is continuing to operate a nationwide network of more than 2,700 locations as the 2026 closure plan moves forward.

National grocery rankings released in 2026 show a familiar pattern in U.S. food retail: shoppers keep rewarding chains that pair strong private-label assortments with an easy in-store experience. For snack lovers, that puts Trader Joe’s at the center of the conversation, while H-E-B, Publix and a handful of regional grocers continue to post strong marks in national studies.

Trader Joe’s moved to the top in the latest national customer satisfaction ranking

Trader Joe’s was the highest-scoring supermarket in the American Customer Satisfaction Index Retail and Consumer Shipping Study 2026, which was released January 27, 2026. The index said Trader Joe’s rose 2% to a score of 86, overtaking Publix, which held at 84, while H-E-B followed at 83 and Aldi and Costco each posted 81. The ACSI study tracks supermarkets as part of a broader retail report and is based on consumer feedback about store experience, product quality and related service measures.

That result matters for snack shoppers because Trader Joe’s has long tied its brand identity to exclusive packaged foods and limited-run items. In the company’s 2025 Customer Choice Awards, announced through its official podcast transcript, Trader Joe’s said Chili & Lime Flavored Rolled Corn Tortilla Chips won favorite snack, marking the product’s fifth win and moving it into the retailer’s internal “Hall of Fame.” The company also said it expected to remain in stock on the item more consistently.

The broad takeaway from those two measures is straightforward. One is an outside national satisfaction index, and the other is Trader Joe’s own customer voting on favorite products, but both point to the same strength: shoppers strongly associate the chain with snacks that are distinctive, easy to find and central to the trip.

Regional leaders are still shaping where snack shoppers spend money

The national data does not point to one single snack destination in every part of the country. Trader Joe’s led the ACSI ranking, but dunnhumby’s ninth annual Retailer Preference Index, released January 7, 2026, ranked H-E-B first among U.S. grocery retailers overall, followed by Market Basket and Woodman’s. That report said its rankings reflect how shoppers weigh price, promotions, quality, digital tools and store experience across the grocery trip.

That split is important at the state and local level because grocery choice remains highly regional. H-E-B’s strength is concentrated in Texas, where its scale and local loyalty give many shoppers a different preferred chain than the one topping a national satisfaction chart. Publix remains especially influential across the Southeast, while Market Basket carries unusual weight in New England, and Woodman’s is a major draw in the Upper Midwest.

What is not publicly confirmed is any national, store-by-store measurement focused only on snacks. Neither ACSI nor dunnhumby publishes a dedicated “best grocery store for snacks” ranking in the materials reviewed here. Instead, the available evidence shows which chains consumers rate highly overall and, in Trader Joe’s case, which snack products rise to the top of direct customer voting.

Value, exclusive products and convenience continue to drive snack loyalty

The reason certain grocery chains keep surfacing in these rankings is tied to the broader economics of food shopping. Dunnhumby said in its 2026 ranking release that financially pressured consumers continue to favor retailers that combine savings with a differentiated experience. In its 2025 report, the firm said top-ranked grocers were separating themselves by delivering a better mix of value, quality and assortment during a prolonged stretch of high food inflation and shifting consumer expectations.

ACSI’s 2026 retail study points to a related dynamic. The organization said convenience of store hours, ease of pickup and mobile app reliability were among the leading customer experience benchmarks in retail, showing that satisfaction is not only about shelf price. For a snack-heavy trip, that means stores benefit when customers can get in quickly, locate familiar favorites and still discover something new.

For customers, the practical message is that the grocery stores snack lovers swear by are generally the ones already performing well on broader retail measures. Trader Joe’s currently holds the top supermarket satisfaction score in ACSI, while H-E-B leads dunnhumby’s latest grocery preference ranking. Those rankings do not prove every shopper wants the same snacks, but they do show which chains are consistently turning snack purchases into repeat visits.

Restaurant delivery is becoming a bigger part of how major retailers compete for convenience-focused customers across the U.S. On September 3, Walmart said it is expanding that push through a new collaboration with Inspire Brands that will let shoppers order Dunkin’ items through Walmart’s app and website. The program starts with Dunkin’ restaurants already operating inside Walmart stores, then is expected to expand far beyond those in-store counters.

Walmart and Dunkin’ formally launch a new delivery partnership

Walmart announced the collaboration on September 3, saying customers will be able to order Dunkin’ beverages and food alongside their Walmart purchases through the company’s digital ordering platform. According to Walmart, the launch begins with the 150 Dunkin’ locations that operate inside Walmart stores. The company also said the service is intended to grow to the majority of Dunkin’s roughly 10,000 U.S. locations outside Walmart stores.

The setup is designed to place Dunkin’ inside the same shopping flow customers already use for groceries, pharmacy items, and general merchandise. Walmart said shoppers who are eligible by delivery address will see Dunkin’ appear in the Restaurants tab in the Walmart app, where they can browse the menu, customize items, and check out in a single transaction. Inspire Brands, Dunkin’s parent company, is participating through the broader agreement Walmart announced this week.

The scale is notable because it moves restaurant ordering beyond the retailer’s in-store food tenants and into a national restaurant brand’s broader off-premises business. Restaurant Dive reported that the Dunkin’ addition follows Walmart’s earlier move into restaurant delivery with Subway and gives the retailer a larger foothold in prepared-food ordering. Walmart described the expansion as part of its effort to pair restaurant meals with the delivery network it already uses for everyday shopping.

What the rollout means in local markets where Walmart and Dunkin’ overlap

For customers, the immediate impact depends on whether they live near one of the 150 Dunkin’ locations already operating inside a Walmart. Walmart has not released a full public list in its September 3 announcement identifying every city or state where those delivery-enabled in-store Dunkin’ units are located. What is confirmed is that availability will be determined by a shopper’s delivery address and surfaced inside the Walmart app or website.

That means the local footprint will likely vary widely, even within states that already have many standalone Dunkin’ restaurants. The broader expansion could eventually matter much more than the in-store launch because Walmart said the partnership is expected to reach the majority of Dunkin’s U.S. locations outside Walmart stores. Until that phase is implemented, though, customers in many markets may not yet see Dunkin’ listed as an option.

The geography matters because Walmart says most Americans already live close to one of its stores. In its announcement and related trade coverage, the company pointed to its national store base and delivery reach as a reason it believes restaurant delivery can scale quickly. For local shoppers, the practical takeaway is simple: some households may gain access immediately, while others will have to wait until Walmart discloses or activates more participating Dunkin’ locations.

Walmart says convenience and delivery scale are driving the expansion

Walmart tied the move directly to convenience and to the strength of its last-mile delivery network. In the company’s statement, Greg Cathey, senior vice president of e-commerce fulfillment transformation at Walmart, said the retailer sees the future of retail as meeting customers where they are and simplifying routine purchases. That framing matches Walmart’s larger strategy of using its existing logistics network to add more categories to a single order.

The delivery economics also help explain the timing. Trade publication Nation’s Restaurant News reported that Walmart’s fast-delivery service for groceries, pharmacy, and general merchandise, delivered in 30 minutes or less, grew 48% in the prior quarter, while total delivery sales rose 40%. Walmart said that fast-delivery service is now available in 38 markets, giving the company a ready-made system for adding restaurant food to trips already moving through its network.

Dunkin’ also framed the partnership as an incremental access play rather than a menu or store redesign. In Walmart’s announcement, Dunkin’ Brand President Scott Murphy said bringing Dunkin’ into the Walmart shopping experience creates another way for guests to get beverages and meals quickly through a platform they already use. For customers, that means the most likely near-term change is not a new product but a new ordering channel, with wider availability expected as the rollout expands.

Americans are still making room in their budgets for restaurant meals. That loyalty is setting the stage for one of the biggest years the industry has ever seen.

A historic sales milestone is coming into view

The clearest sign of the industry’s momentum is the topline forecast. The National Restaurant Association projects total US restaurant and foodservice sales will reach $1.55 trillion in 2026, which would mark a new high for the sector. It also expects operators to add more than 100,000 jobs, bringing total industry employment to 15.8 million.

That headline number matters because it shows how deeply restaurants remain woven into daily life. Even after several years of inflation, shifting work patterns, and tighter household budgets, diners have not abandoned eating out, takeout, or delivery. The industry is not simply recovering anymore; it is expanding into a larger and more structurally important part of the consumer economy.

Recent sales data reinforces that point. The National Restaurant Association said restaurant sales in July 2026 were 5.0% above year-earlier levels, while real eating-and-drinking-place sales rose 1.6% from July 2025. In other words, this is not just a price story. Adjusted for inflation, the industry is still finding ways to grow.

Demand is resilient, even when traffic is uneven

The record-year narrative does come with nuance. Black Box Intelligence has reported that same-store traffic remains negative across much of the industry, even as sales stay positive. June 2026 trends showed guest counts still down year over year, a reminder that many chains are relying on pricing, mix, and check growth as much as sheer footfall.

Still, resilience is the defining word. Consumers may be visiting slightly less often, but they continue to spend when they do go out. That dynamic favors brands that can deliver a clear value equation, whether that means affordable combo meals, premium fast-casual upgrades, or convenience-led off-premise dining.

Segments are not moving in lockstep, either. Black Box Intelligence has noted that some categories have outperformed others, while family dining has remained comparatively weak. That split helps explain why the strongest operators are focusing less on broad industry averages and more on targeted execution: menu engineering, labor retention, digital ordering, and sharper promotions designed to protect margin without alienating price-sensitive guests.

Operators are winning with discipline, technology, and adaptability

A record sales year does not mean an easy one. The National Restaurant Association has warned that restaurants are still navigating elevated food and labor costs, uneven traffic, and cautious spending among lower- and middle-income households. Its updated 2026 commentary says sales should still rise, though at a slightly slower pace than forecast at the start of the year.

That makes operational discipline the real story behind the headline growth. Restaurants are leaning harder on technology that improves throughput and guest connection, from more efficient ordering systems to data-driven marketing. The goal is not flashy transformation for its own sake, but practical productivity in an environment where every labor hour and every menu item has to work harder.

The result is an industry that looks more mature and more strategic than it did a few years ago. Some weaker locations will close, and some brands will struggle to keep pace. But the broader market is proving that scale, adaptability, and consumer relevance can coexist. If current forecasts hold, 2026 will not just be a good year for US restaurants. It will be the year the industry sets a new benchmark.

Global restaurant chains have continued to push beyond North America as they look for new growth markets and local operating partners. Chipotle Mexican Grill has now joined that expansion wave in Asia, opening its first restaurant on the continent in Seoul, South Korea, and identifying the country as a launch point for broader regional growth. The move gives the California-based fast-casual chain a new foothold in a market it says is positioned to shape its next phase overseas.

Chipotle’s first Asia opening is now official

Chipotle confirmed on September 2 that it opened its first restaurant in Asia at 423 Gangnam-daero in Seocho-gu, Seoul, in partnership with Sangmidang Holdings. The company said the Seoul restaurant is its first on the continent and that the opening establishes South Korea as a reference market for future growth across Asia. Yonhap also reported that crowds lined up ahead of the launch in Gangnam, underscoring the visibility of the brand’s arrival in the South Korean capital.

The Seoul operation is being run through S&C Restaurants Holdings, a joint venture between Chipotle and an affiliate of Sangmidang Holdings, according to Chipotle and South Korean business reports. Seoul Economic Daily reported the venture is structured as a 51-49 split between Sangmidang’s side and Chipotle, while Chipotle said the partnership is intended to support a measured regional rollout. Company statements said two more South Korea locations are expected to open by the end of 2026.

Chipotle described the restaurant as a milestone in its international expansion strategy. In the company’s announcement, Chief Executive Scott Boatwright said Asia represents a significant growth opportunity and identified South Korea as an ideal market for introducing the brand to the region. That framing makes the Seoul opening more than a single-store debut; it is the company’s first formal operating base in Asia.

Seoul is confirmed, while the rest of the rollout is still limited

What is confirmed so far is narrow and specific: Chipotle’s first Asia location is in Seoul’s Gangnam area, and two more South Korea stores are planned before the end of this year, according to the company. What is not yet public is a full city-by-city rollout plan beyond the first site. The company has not released a comprehensive list of additional South Korea locations, and it has not publicly identified precise opening dates for the next two restaurants.

The Seoul store matters because Chipotle said South Korea will serve as a reference market for future Asian growth. That gives Seoul an outsized role in testing how the chain’s ordering model, menu format, and operating system translate to a different consumer base. Local coverage in South Korea has described the Gangnam opening as the brand’s regional entry point rather than a one-off licensing deal.

The next confirmed geography after South Korea is Singapore. Chipotle’s announcement said the company plans to debut there in 2027 through the same broader partnership structure, though no specific address or opening month has been released. For now, Seoul is the only confirmed Asia market where customers can visit an operating Chipotle location.

The expansion reflects Chipotle’s broader international strategy

The immediate reason for the move is growth. Chipotle said South Korea was chosen because of its engaged consumers, sophisticated restaurant culture, and strong appreciation for authenticity and ingredient quality, while Boatwright said the region offers demand for variety, convenience, and food prepared fresh and served quickly. Those statements place the Seoul opening within a deliberate market-selection strategy rather than an opportunistic test.

The Asia opening also follows a series of partner-led international moves. Chipotle expanded to the Middle East through Alshaya Group after announcing that development agreement in 2023, and company materials have also pointed to planned growth in Mexico, Singapore, and South Korea. Its 2025 sustainability report said Chipotle had entered development agreements or joint ventures for those markets, showing that the Asia launch was part of a longer pipeline already under construction.

For customers, the practical takeaway is straightforward: Chipotle is now open in Seoul, with more South Korea locations expected before the end of 2026 if the company stays on its announced timeline. The company has not announced menu-wide regional changes beyond bringing its standard burritos, bowls, tacos, and salads to the market. Its next confirmed step in Asia is Singapore in 2027, which means the Seoul store is both a customer-facing opening and a test case for how far the brand can scale across the region.

Maine did something no other state had done before. In 2021, voters turned the idea of food access and self-provision into a constitutional right.

The result was historic, but not uncomplicated. Supporters saw a breakthrough for food sovereignty, while critics and even some allies argued the final measure was narrower, murkier, and less transformative than it first appeared.

A first-in-the-nation victory with deep rural roots

Maine’s right-to-food amendment became part of the state constitution after voters approved it on November 2, 2021, by a margin of 249,273 to 160,440, according to the governor’s proclamation. The language added Article I, Section 25, declaring that all individuals have a natural, inherent and unalienable right to food, including the right to save and exchange seeds and to grow, raise, harvest, produce, and consume food of their own choosing for nourishment, sustenance, bodily health, and well-being. The provision also built in limits, barring trespassing, theft, poaching, and other abuses of private property, public lands, or natural resources.

The amendment did not emerge in a vacuum. It grew out of Maine’s long-running food sovereignty movement, which has argued that small farmers, local consumers, and rural communities should have more control over how food is produced and exchanged. That push helped lead to the 2017 Maine Food Sovereignty Act, which allows municipalities to adopt local ordinances governing some direct producer-to-consumer transactions and frames local control as part of rural economic development.

For many Mainers, especially in agricultural areas, the amendment was about resilience as much as ideology. It reflected concerns about fragile supply chains, household self-sufficiency, seed saving, backyard food production, and the right to participate directly in local food systems. In that sense, Maine’s move carried symbolic force far beyond the state, signaling that food could be treated not just as a commodity, but as a protected civil value.

Why supporters celebrated, even as the legal impact stayed uncertain

Backers viewed the amendment as a rare constitutional recognition of everyday practices that often sit below the radar of major agricultural policy: home gardens, backyard flocks, seed exchange, home-scale harvesting, and direct relationships between neighbors and local producers. Legal scholars writing in the Maine Law Review have described the amendment as the product of more than a decade of advocacy and a new chapter in the state’s food sovereignty movement.

The broad language also gave advocates room to argue that government should think differently about food regulation. If the constitution protects people’s ability to produce and obtain food for their own well-being, they contend, then local ordinances and state rules should be interpreted with that right in mind rather than assuming regulation always comes first. Maine law now explicitly says food sovereignty statutes should be construed to protect the right to food declared in Article I, Section 25.

That matters because constitutional language can shape future litigation even when it does not instantly erase existing rules. In practice, supporters hoped the amendment would strengthen challenges to restrictive local zoning, give towns more confidence in protecting traditional foodways, and provide a legal backstop for household and community food production. The amendment’s biggest immediate effect may have been to change the terms of the debate, elevating food autonomy from a policy preference to a rights-based argument.

Where critics say the amendment fell short

The biggest criticism is that the amendment made history without clearly settling what it overrides. Maine’s own legal commentary has noted that its boundaries remain unclear, especially when the right to food collides with municipal health and safety rules, animal welfare standards, or land-use restrictions such as backyard chicken ordinances. That uncertainty means many disputes are likely to be resolved slowly, case by case, rather than through a sweeping immediate change.

Critics also point out that the state’s food sovereignty framework has hard limits. A Maine Department of Agriculture factsheet states that meat and poultry products are specifically exempt from food sovereignty ordinances because of food-safety hazards, and that all meat and poultry production entering commerce must still follow state licensure or registration rules. In other words, one of the most politically charged areas of food production remained outside the amendment’s practical reach.

Court precedent also shows the strength of existing public-health oversight. In State v. Brown, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court held in 2014 that Blue Hill’s local food ordinance did not exempt a farmer from state licensing and raw milk labeling requirements, emphasizing the state’s essential role in protecting public health. That case predates the constitutional amendment, but it helps explain why skeptics say the celebrated victory was never a blank check. Maine may have pioneered a right to food, yet the hardest question remains unresolved: how far that right can go before safety regulation pushes back.

Uber is one of the country’s biggest transportation and delivery companies, and its business has expanded rapidly across ride-hailing, restaurant delivery, grocery, retail, and logistics in recent years. On September 2, 2026, the company confirmed a broad restructuring that will reduce its workforce by about 10%, a move that reaches well beyond any one business line. The changes matter nationally because Uber’s platform touches restaurants, drivers, couriers, riders, and corporate teams across the United States.

Uber confirmed a broad corporate layoff tied to a reorganization

Uber said on September 2 that it is reducing the size of its team by about 10% as part of what Chief Executive Officer Dara Khosrowshahi described in a company message as an effort to build a “simpler and faster” organization. Nation’s Restaurant News, citing a Bloomberg report that Uber confirmed, reported that the cuts amount to roughly 3,300 jobs. Uber had about 34,000 employees worldwide at the end of last year, according to company financial filings.

Khosrowshahi said the reorganization includes removing management layers, eliminating some “micro-teams” with only one or two direct reports, and combining groups that had become fragmented as the business expanded. In the same employee message published by Uber, he said affected workers had already been notified, except in countries where local process requirements still apply. The company said the changes are about structure and priorities rather than employee performance.

The restructuring also reaches into Uber’s delivery business. Nation’s Restaurant News reported that Uber’s Restaurants, Retail, and Direct delivery verticals will be combined into one structure at the global, regional, and country levels. Uber told the publication that restaurants and other business customers using Uber Eats should not expect service changes as a result of the reorganization.

The U.S. footprint is clear, but location-by-location cuts are not yet public

What is confirmed is that the layoffs are corporate and global in scope, not a shutdown of Uber’s consumer app or a pullback from U.S. delivery service. Uber operates across major U.S. markets, including in restaurant delivery through Uber Eats, but the company has not released a comprehensive list of affected U.S. offices, cities, or state-by-state employee totals tied to this round of layoffs. It also has not publicly identified how many of the roughly 3,300 eliminated roles are based in the United States.

That means the local impact remains only partially known. No public filing reviewed for this report identified specific facility addresses, city-level corporate office counts, or a state-by-state breakout for the September 2 action. Uber said some employees in certain countries would be notified later to comply with local labor rules, which indicates timing may vary by market.

For restaurant operators, merchants, and customers, the immediate message from the company has been continuity. Uber told Nation’s Restaurant News that service for restaurants and other businesses on Uber Eats is not expected to change under the new structure. Without a public list of office locations or WARN-style notices attached to this action in the source material reviewed, it is not yet possible to verify which U.S. cities will see the heaviest corporate impact.

Uber says growth created complexity, and the overhaul is meant to address it

Uber’s explanation centers on organization rather than collapsing demand. In his September 2 message, Khosrowshahi said the company has grown quickly and that growth has made the business more complex and slower to execute. He said the restructuring is intended to free up resources for future investment and make decision-making more efficient across the company.

That reasoning is consistent with Uber’s recent financial filings. In its June 30, 2026 quarterly filing, the company said expansion across business lines and geographies had increased operational complexity and put strain on management, personnel, systems, and financial controls. The filing also stated that workforce reductions can create risks, including distraction, morale issues, and difficulty achieving expected benefits, but it framed restructuring as a tool the company may use while scaling.

The move also comes as delivery competition remains intense. Nation’s Restaurant News noted that Grubhub owner Wonder confirmed a 7% reduction in its corporate staff one day earlier, describing that move as a streamlining effort. For customers and restaurant partners, Uber’s current position is that the restructuring is internal and that the company intends to keep investing in future growth while maintaining service across its delivery and transportation platforms.

Daily sedentary habits are getting renewed scrutiny as researchers look more closely at how screen time and other low-movement routines may shape long-term brain health. The latest attention is on mentally passive sitting, particularly television viewing, after a study found that this kind of behavior was associated with a 43% higher risk of dementia compared with more mentally engaging sedentary time. The finding adds to a broader body of research suggesting that not all sitting carries the same cognitive risk.

The study behind the 43% figure

The headline figure comes from a newly surfaced cohort study examining mentally active versus mentally passive sedentary behavior and dementia risk over 19 years. In that research, investigators reported that passive sedentary habits such as TV viewing were linked to a significantly higher dementia risk, while more cognitively engaging sedentary activities did not show the same pattern, according to the study abstract indexed by ScienceDirect and related academic listings published in 2026.

The study fits with earlier large-scale evidence from JAMA Network Open, which tracked nearly 50,000 older adults in the United Kingdom using wrist accelerometers. That 2023 paper found that longer uninterrupted sedentary time was associated with a higher risk of incident dementia, even after researchers adjusted for physical activity and a range of health and demographic factors. The National Institute on Aging later said those findings strengthened the association between prolonged sedentary behavior and dementia risk.

Researchers have also emphasized that the issue may be more specific than total sitting time alone. Earlier work cited in JAMA noted that cognitively passive activities such as watching TV may be associated with increased dementia risk, while computer use and other mentally active tasks may differ in their relationship to brain health. That distinction is central to how the newer 43% figure is being interpreted.

What this means in the United States

For U.S. readers, the practical takeaway is that common leisure routines may matter as much as total hours spent seated. Television remains one of the most common passive sedentary activities in American households, and newer research has continued to evaluate whether the pattern holds across different populations, including U.S. adults.

What is confirmed is that several studies and reviews now point in the same direction: more passive sedentary behavior is associated with higher dementia risk. A 2025 meta-analysis indexed in PubMed found that high sedentary time defined by TV viewing was associated with a 31% increased risk of dementia compared with lower exposure, reinforcing the broader trend. What is not yet known is whether changing one specific habit alone will directly prevent dementia, because these studies generally show association rather than proof of causation.

There is also no single national threshold that public health agencies have established for “safe” TV viewing in dementia prevention. Some newer observational work has suggested risk may rise more clearly at higher viewing durations, but researchers have not produced a universal cutoff that applies to every adult. That leaves the evidence strongest on direction, not on an exact prescription.

Why researchers think passive sitting may matter

Scientists have pointed to several possible reasons passive sedentary time could affect cognitive health. Prior reviews have noted that prolonged sitting may contribute to poorer glucose regulation, lipid metabolism, and cardiovascular health, all of which are themselves linked to cognitive decline and dementia risk. Those biological pathways help explain why sedentary behavior remains under study even when exercise is considered separately.

Another explanation is cognitive stimulation. Mentally active behaviors, even when done seated, may engage attention, memory, planning, or problem-solving in ways that passive viewing does not. That theory has appeared repeatedly across the literature, including in JAMA-linked commentary and more recent reviews comparing TV viewing with computer use.

For readers, the current evidence suggests the concern is not simply whether someone sits, but whether long blocks of passive screen time dominate the day. Researchers have said more work is needed to determine causation, but the existing findings consistently support reducing prolonged passive sedentary time and replacing at least some of it with movement or more cognitively engaging activity when possible.

It sounds absurd at first. One bagel is tax-free, another gets taxed, and the only visible difference may be a knife cut.

But New York’s bagel rule is not really about bagels. It is about the state’s long-standing distinction between basic groceries and prepared food.

The grocery rule ends when service begins

New York generally exempts food and food products sold by food stores from sales tax, which is why an ordinary bagel bought by quantity is usually not taxed. The state’s own tax guidance lists bagels among foods that can be sold tax-free when they are treated like grocery items rather than ready-to-eat meals, according to the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance.

That same guidance draws a sharp line once the seller adds preparation or service. A bagel sold toasted, buttered, or with cream cheese is taxable, and the state also treats certain forms of slicing and serving as signs that the item has crossed into prepared-food territory. In plain English, the tax is triggered less by the dough itself than by what the shop does to it before handing it over.

This is the logic behind the famous “bagel tax.” A dozen whole bagels taken home is considered grocery-style food. A bagel split, smeared, wrapped, and served for immediate eating looks more like the kind of meal a deli, café, or restaurant sells, and New York taxes those sales under its prepared-food rules.

Why slicing matters more than people think

The slicing issue confuses people because slicing alone can seem trivial. But New York’s food-store bulletin says taxability depends on how food is sold, and its bagel example distinguishes between bagels sold by quantity, whether whole or sliced, and bagels sold toasted, buttered, or with cream cheese. That means a bakery simply selling sliced bagels in bulk is not automatically creating a taxable sale.

The real-world controversy comes from the typical bagel-shop transaction. When a counter worker slices a single bagel to order, often adds a spread, wraps it, and serves it as breakfast or lunch, the state sees more than a grocery purchase. It sees preparation for immediate consumption, the same principle used to tax sandwiches and many restaurant foods.

New York’s sandwich guidance reinforces that approach. The state says a sandwich can be as simple as a buttered bagel or roll, which shows how easily a bagel moves from exempt bread product to taxable prepared meal. So the memorable sliced-versus-unsliced shorthand is useful, but it is slightly incomplete; what really matters is whether the bagel is being sold as a grocery item or as ready-to-eat food.

The bagel rule is quirky, but the tax policy is common

New York’s rule gets headlines because bagels are iconic and the distinction feels intensely local. Yet the policy itself is not unusual. States across the country often exempt groceries while taxing restaurant meals, hot foods, and prepared items, and New York applies that framework with unusually specific examples.

For consumers, the practical effect is simple. If you buy bagels the way you buy bread for home, the sale is generally exempt. If the shop prepares one for you to eat now, especially by toasting it or adding butter or cream cheese, sales tax usually applies under state rules and, in many places, local sales taxes as well.

For shop owners, the rule is less funny than operational. They must decide which transactions count as exempt food sales and which count as taxable prepared food, then collect and remit the proper tax. That is why the bagel tax survives: not because Albany wanted to single out a beloved breakfast, but because bagels sit exactly on the border between grocery staple and prepared meal.

Across the U.S., scrambled eggs remain one of the most frequently cooked breakfast foods, but they are also one of the easiest dishes to overcook at home. Jacques Pépin’s method, revisited in food coverage published on February 17, 2024, narrows that problem to a specific technique: adding a small amount of reserved raw beaten egg off the heat at the end. The result, according to the recipe demonstrations and follow-up reporting, is a softer, creamier scramble that avoids the dry curds many cooks accept as normal.

Jacques Pépin’s method changes the final step, not the ingredient list

The specific action in Pépin’s technique is straightforward: before the eggs go into the pan, he sets aside a small amount of the beaten mixture and cooks the rest first, then stirs the reserved raw egg back in after removing the pan from the heat, as described in Parade’s February 17, 2024 report on his soft scrambled eggs. That final addition is paired with vigorous stirring, and Parade reported that Pépin also adds cream off the heat to finish the eggs. The scale of the change is small, but the effect is tied to temperature control rather than extra ingredients.

The method matters because scrambled eggs continue cooking from residual heat after the burner is turned off. Parade’s account of Pépin’s demonstration said the reserved egg lightly cooks when it is stirred back into the hot curds, which helps create a richer, looser texture instead of a firm set. In other words, the trick is less about seasoning and more about stopping the eggs before they cross into overcooked territory.

Recent food coverage has treated that step as the main distinction between Pépin’s eggs and more conventional American-style scrambles. A separate 2024 report tied to chef J. Kenji López-Alt’s writing said he learned the same reserve-egg idea from Pépin and described it as a way to preserve egg flavor while softening the final texture, reinforcing that the technique has been influential beyond Pépin’s own kitchen.

The impact for home cooks is practical, but some details still vary by recipe

For U.S. home cooks, the immediate takeaway is confirmed: Pépin’s method is designed for a softer scramble, and it relies on heat management more than elaborate equipment. Coverage of the technique consistently points to stirring the eggs continuously and pulling them before they look fully done, because the eggs will continue to set in the pan. That makes the trick especially relevant for people cooking breakfast quickly on standard home stovetops, where overheating is common.

What is not fully standardized is the exact proportion of raw egg to reserve at the start. The recent reports describing Pépin’s technique explain the step clearly, but they do not all publish the same measurement for how much beaten egg should be held back. The available coverage also does not establish a single mandatory fat level, since some versions mention butter and cream while others emphasize the reserve-egg step itself as the critical move.

That means the broad lesson is verified, while some recipe specifics still depend on the version being followed. The core point remains that the eggs should come off the heat while still slightly loose. Food writers summarizing the method have presented that as the line many home cooks miss when they wait for the eggs to look fully finished in the skillet.

The broader context is a long-running shift toward softer eggs and better heat control

The reason this technique resonates now is that scrambled eggs sit at the center of a wider debate over texture. Some cooks prefer large, fluffy curds cooked quickly, while French-style soft eggs emphasize smaller curds, lower heat, and constant movement. Parade’s reporting on Pépin’s method frames his approach as the “classic” soft scramble, and that aligns with the broader culinary standard that gentler heat produces a creamier result.

Additional 2024 coverage connecting Pépin’s method to López-Alt’s work adds another layer of context: the reserve-egg finish offers richness without relying only on dairy. That matters at a time when many recipe developers are reexamining old assumptions about adding milk to scrambled eggs. The focus has shifted toward managing protein coagulation carefully so the eggs stay tender.

For customers and readers at home, the practical expectation is simple. Pépin’s trick does not require a specialty pan, unusual ingredients, or restaurant training. It asks cooks to stop treating scrambled eggs as finished only when they are dry and fully set, and instead remove them earlier, then use the reserved egg to finish them gently off the heat.