Twitter Facebook RSS Feed Print
Your Baby

Toxic Chemicals Found in Baby Foods

2:00

Most parents naturally assume that store-bought baby foods and formulas are well regulated and safe for their babies to consume. That may not be the case says a recent study released by the Clean Label Project. In fact, many of these products may contain high-levels of toxins, researchers said.

For the study, Clean Label Project, a non-profit which advocates for transparent labeling of products, looked at the top-selling formulas and baby food as well as emerging national brands based on Nielsen data. Of about 530 products that the researchers tested, 65 percent were found positive for arsenic, 58 percent for cadmium, 36 percent for lead, and 10 percent for acrylamide.

The highest toxin level found was arsenic. It is associated with cardiovascular conditions, developmental defects, diabetes, neurotoxicity, skin lesions, and even cancer, was present in nearly 80 percent of infant formulas. Rice-based baby food such as snack puffs, tend to have the highest levels of arsenic.

In 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration proposed a limit of 100 parts per billion of arsenic in infant rice cereal, but isn't enforcing that limit. Rice often absorbs arsenic from contaminated soil as it grows in the environment.

"It is important for consumers to understand that some contaminants, such as heavy metals like lead or arsenic, are in the environment and cannot simply be removed from food," said Peter Cassell, a FDA spokesperson.

BPA was also found, although many companies now advertise as PBA free. Sixty-percent were found positive for the industrial chemical bisphenol A.

Lead, known for its’ devastating impact on children’s health, was found in 36 percent of the products. Low levels of lead in children's blood have been connected to lower IQs, slowed growth, behavioral problems, hearing issues and anemia, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

Gerber, Mead Johnson (Enfamil), Plum Organics all released statements following the study assuring customers their products adhere to strict safety standards. Gerber said its foods "meet or exceed U.S. government standards for quality and safety." Mead Johnson said it specifically monitors the presence of many materials, including arsenic, cadmium, lead, BPA and acrylamide to ensure "safety and high quality." Plum, who also stressed products are "completely safe," said over the past year, it's created "new, more robust guidelines for contaminants in our products" and is in the process of implementing those rules.

Jaclyn Bowen, executive director of Clean Label Project, said, "The baby industry needs to do a better job in protecting America’s most vulnerable population,"

The researchers found that mainstream brands, which include Enfamil, Gerber, Plum Organics, and Sprout, were among the worst offenders that scored two out of five in the report on toxic metals.

A more in-depth review of the study can be found on http://www.cleanlabelproject.org/product-ratings/infant-formula-baby-food/

Story sources: Ashley May, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/10/25/these-baby-foods-and-formulas-tested-positive-arsenic-lead-and-bpa-new-study/794291001/

Allan Adamson, http://www.techtimes.com/articles/214847/20171025/baby-food-and-infant-formulas-tested-positive-for-arsenic-lead-and-other-toxic-chemicals.htm

Your Baby

Ditch the Smartphone Apps to Monitor Baby’s Health

1:45

If you use a smartphone app to monitor your baby’s vital signs, a new research paper suggests that you may want to send those apps to trash.

The apps are linked to sensors in a baby’s clothing and are marketed as a way to help parents be aware of things like breathing, pulse rate and oxygen levels in the blood and sound alarms when infants are in distress. But they aren't tested or approved for U.S. sale like medical devices and there's little evidence to suggest these monitors are safe or effective, said Dr. Christopher Bonafide, lead author of the opinion piece in JAMA; an international peer-reviewed medical journal.

"I’ve been there myself, peeking in the door of my son’s room late at night, making sure I could hear him breathing," Bonafide, a pediatrics researcher at the University of Pennsylvania and Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, said by email to Reuters.

Marketing ads of the monitors stop short of saying they can diagnose, treat or prevent illnesses, however, they do promise parents peace of mind that comes from an early warning system when something is wrong with babies' health, the study authors write.

Promotions for some apps also play into parents’ fear of SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome), suggesting that parents can have peace of mind that their baby is just sleeping,

The AAP advises parents not to use monitors like the ones paired with smartphone apps for home use because there's no evidence this reduces the risk of SIDS.

Instead, parents should rely on prevention efforts proven to work, like breastfeeding and sleeping in the same room with their babies, the AAP recommends.

"Perhaps in the future there may be a technology that is in development to lower the risk of SIDS," said Dr. Lori Feldman-Winter, a co-author of the AAP guidelines and pediatrics researcher at Cooper Medical School of Rowan University in Camden, New Jersey.

"However, we are not there yet," Feldman-Winter - who wasn't involved in the paper, - added in an email to Reuters.

Sometimes, we as consumers, assume that if something is for sale- particularly a health related item- that it has been approved or tested by a U.S. governmental agency. That’s not always the case. Smartphone applications can be created and sold relatively easily these days without any assurance the app actually performs as promoted. Parents of newborns are a good market for anything that promises to keep their baby safe.

New smartphone-integrated monitors currently available in the U.S. or expected to debut soon include Baby Vida, MonBaby, Owlet, Snuza Pico and Sproutling.

Some pediatric health experts express concern that using apps to monitor a baby’s health actually reduces the parent’s ability to know their own baby’s unique habits, body and cues that he or she may be in distress.

"We have lost sight of what babies need in order to keep them safe, and many parents and grandparents today do not realize that it is the presence of a responsive and vigilant caregiver that keeps a baby safe, but believe the job can be outsourced to a smartphone/video-monitor/technomattress etc," said Helen Ball, director of the Parent-Infant Sleep Lab at Durham University in the UK, in an email. Ball was not involved in the paper.

Ball believes that the best way to keep our babies’ safe is to use our eyes, ears and touch to respond to and monitor for any health concerns.

Story source: Lisa Rapaport, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-safety-baby-monitors-idUSKBN1582RA

http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2598780

Your Baby

Infant Ear Infections Declining

2:00

Ear infections in infants are very common and can be quite unsettling for parents. The good news is that ear infections among U.S. babies are declining according to a new study.

Researchers found that 46 percent of babies followed between 2008 and 2014 had a middle ear infection by the time they were 1 year old. While that percentage may seem high, it was lower when compared against U.S. studies from the 1980s and '90s, the researchers added. Back then, around 60 percent of babies had suffered an ear infection by their first birthday, the study authors said.

The decline is not surprising, according to lead researcher Dr. Tasnee Chonmaitree, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Texas Medical Branch, in Galveston.

"This is what we anticipated," she said.

That's in large part because of a vaccine that's been available in recent years: the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, Chonmaitree said. The pneumococcal conjugate vaccine protects against several strains of pneumococcal bacteria, which can cause serious diseases like pneumonia, meningitis and bloodstream infections.

Those bacteria are also one of the major causes of children's middle ear infections, Chonmaitree said.

She added that flu shots, which are now recommended for children starting at 6 months, could be helping as well. Many times an ear infection will follow a viral infection such as the flu or a cold.

Vaccinations "could very well be one of the drivers" behind the decline in infant ear infections, agreed Dr. Joseph Bernstein, a pediatric otolaryngologist who wasn't involved in the study.

Other factors could be having a positive impact as well, such as rising rates of breast-feeding and a decrease in babies’ exposure to secondhand smoke.

"The data really do suggest that breast-feeding -- particularly exclusive breast-feeding in the first six months of life -- helps lower the risk of ear infections," said Bernstein, who is director of pediatric otolaryngology at the New York Eye and Ear Infirmary of Mount Sinai, in New York City.

There's also the fact that breast-fed babies are less likely to spend time drinking from a bottle while lying down, Bernstein noted. That position can make some infants more vulnerable to ear infections, he said.

The study findings were based on 367 babies followed during their first year of life. By the age of 3 months, 6 percent had been diagnosed with a middle ear infection; by the age of 12 months, that had risen 46 percent, researchers found.

Breast-fed babies had a lower ear infection risk, however. Those who'd been exclusively breast-fed for at least three months were 60 percent less likely to develop an ear infection in their first six months, the study showed.

But whether babies are breast-fed or not, they will benefit from routine vaccinations, Chonmaitree said. "Parents should make sure they're on schedule with the recommended vaccines," she said.

Parents can have a difficult time recognizing an ear infection in an infant or a child to young to tell them that their ear hurts.

Some symptoms to watch for are:

·      Tugging at the ear

·      Fever

·      Crying more than usual

·      Irritability

·      Child becomes more upset when lying down

·      Difficulty sleeping

·      Diminished appetite

·      Vomiting

·      Diarrhea

·      Pus or fluid draining from ear

Treatment for ear infections rarely requires medication, such as antibiotics, except when an infection is severe or in infants. 

According to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), most children with middle ear infections get better without antibiotics, and doctors often recommend pain relievers -- like acetaminophen -- to start. But with babies, Bernstein said, antibiotics are often used right away.

The AAP recommends antibiotics for infants who are 6 months old or younger, and for older babies and toddlers who have moderate to severe ear pain.

The study was published online in the March edition of the journal Pediatrics.

Story source: Amy Norton, http://www.webmd.com/children/news/20160328/infant-ear-infections-becoming-less-common

Your Baby

New Guidelines To Help Prevent Peanut Allergies

1:45

Peanut allergy is one of the most common food allergies. Even trace amounts can cause a severe reaction in a child that is allergic to the legume. Parents may be able to reduce the chance that their children will develop peanut allergies by introducing the food early on, as young as four to six months of age, experts now say.

The results of several studies on the positive benefits of introducing peanuts into a child’s diet, early in their life, are encouraging new recommendations from allergy experts.

“Guidance regarding when to introduce peanut into the diet of an infant is changing, based on new research that shows that early introduction around 4-6 months of life, after a few other foods have been introduced into the infant’s diet, is associated with a significantly reduced risk of such infants developing peanut allergy,” said Dr. Matthew Greenhawt, a pediatrician and co-director of the Food Challenge and Research Unit at Children’s Hospital Colorado in Aurora, Colorado, who coauthored the update.

“This is an amazing opportunity to help potentially reduce the number of cases of peanut allergy, but this can only be done with the cooperation of parents and healthcare providers,” Greenhawt told Reuters Health.

Research used for the restructured recommendations comes from the Learning Early about Peanut Allergy (LEAP) study. In that trial, infants at high risk for peanut allergies who were exposed to peanuts early were less likely to develop an allergy by the time they reached five years of age. The findings from that study were published last year in The New England Journal of Medicine.

The guidelines offer three approaches to introducing peanuts to infants- depending on their risk of allergy.

-       Infants with severe eczema, egg allergy or both are at high risk for peanut allergy. They should be exposed to peanuts as early as four to six months to reduce the risk of allergy. Beforehand, however, these infants should undergo a skin prick test. If the test yields no welt or a small welt of up to 2mm, parents can introduce peanuts at home. But if the test yields a welt of 3mm or larger, peanuts should be introduced in the doctor’s office - or not at all if the welt is large and an allergist recommends avoidance.

-       Infants with mild to moderate eczema who have already started solid foods should be exposed to peanuts at six months of age.

-       Infants without eczema or any food allergy are at low risk, and parents can introduce peanuts in an age-appropriate form at any time starting at age six months.

Giving an infant a whole peanut is not recommended because they can choke on them. However, there are ways to prepare peanuts that can be introduced safely.

Another coauthor of the new guidelines, Dr. Amal Assa’ad, a pediatrician and director of the FARE Food Allergy Center of Excellence at the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center in Ohio, told Reuters Health, “Several appropriate forms of peanut-containing foods are creamy peanut butter that can be made softer or more liquefied by adding warm water and let it cool, or serving corn puffs containing peanut. For older infants, peanut butter can be added to apple sauce or other fruit purees.”

Parents should consult with an allergist or their pediatrician before giving their infant peanuts in any form.

While the news about early peanut allergy intervention has been noted by various medical, media and social networks, reliable strategies for how to determine who should and should not get the therapy and when to start it, have not been available. These new guidelines help answer those questions.

The updated guidelines will be published online in January on the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases website; in the meantime, the site provides the current 2010 guidelines on peanut and other food allergies.

Story source: Rob Goodler, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-allergies-peanuts-idUSKBN1361VW

 

Your Baby

How Safe is Your Baby’s Teething Ring?

1:30

Millions of American babies suck on teething rings to ease the discomfort of emerging teeth. Many of those rings contain banned chemicals that can be hazardous to their health, according to new study.

Researchers in the United States, who tested five-dozen baby teething rings, found all of them contained bisphenol-A (BPA) and other endocrine-disrupting chemicals.

Studies in animals have shown that endocrine disruptors interfere with hormones and cause developmental, reproductive and neurological harm, according to the study authors.

Labeling on the teething rings was deceptive, with most of the products characterized as BPA-free or non-toxic. All of them contained BPA, the study found. BPA is banned from children's drinking utensils in the United States and much of Europe.

BPA was not the only banned chemical found; the rings that were tested also contained parabens and the antimicrobial agents triclosan and triclocarban, which are also endocrine disruptors, the researchers said.

"The findings could be used to develop appropriate policies to protect infants from exposure to potentially toxic chemicals found in teethers," said study author Kurunthachalam Kannan and colleagues from the N.Y. State Department of Health's Wadsworth Center.

Because babies suck on teething rings, the presence of potentially harmful chemicals on the surface is concerning, the researchers said. The study authors said this is especially true since they found that BPA and other chemicals leached out of the rings into water.

The 59 teething rings analyzed were purchased online in the United States and tested for 26 potential endocrine-disrupting chemicals, the researchers said.

There are alternatives to teething rings. Frozen mini-bagels, wet washcloths, silicone toys and wooden spoons are just a few examples. Never leave your baby unattended with any of these alternatives. While they are very effective, you should make sure to keep an eye on your little one anytime they have something in their mouth.

The results of the study were published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.

Story source: Robert Preidt, https://consumer.healthday.com/environmental-health-information-12/chemical-health-news-730/is-that-baby-teether-safe-717512.html

 

 

Your Baby

Moms Getting Poor Advice on Baby’s Health Care

2:00

Moms are getting conflicting advice on infant and child care from family members, online searchers and even their family doctors a recent study found.

Oftentimes, that advice goes against the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommendations for topics such as breast-feeding, vaccines, pacifier use and infant-sleep, researchers say.

"In order for parents to make informed decisions about their baby's health and safety, it is important that they get information, and that the information is accurate," said the study's lead author, Dr. Staci Eisenberg, a pediatrician at Boston Medical Center.

"We know from prior studies that advice matters," Eisenberg said. Parents are more likely to follow the recommendations of medical professionals when they "receive appropriate advice from multiple sources, such as family and physicians," she added.

The researchers surveyed more than 1,000 U.S. mothers. Their children were between 2 months and 6 months old. Researchers asked the mothers what advice they had been given on a variety of topics, including vaccines, breastfeeding, pacifiers and infant sleep position and location.

Sources for information included medical professionals, family members, online searches and other media such as television shows. Mothers got the majority of their advice from doctors. However, some of that advice contradicted the recommendations from the AAP on these topics.

For example, as much as 15 percent of the advice mothers received from doctors on breast-feeding and on pacifiers didn't match recommendations. Similarly, 26 percent of advice about sleeping positions contradicted recommendations. And nearly 29 percent of mothers got misinformation on where babies should sleep, the study found.

"I don't think too many people will be shocked to learn that medical advice found online or on an episode of Dr. Oz might be very different from the recommendations of pediatric medical experts or even unsupported by legitimate evidence," said Dr. Clay Jones, a pediatrician specializing in newborn medicine at Newton-Wellesley Hospital in Massachusetts. He said inaccurate advice from some family members might not be surprising, too.

Mothers got advice from family members between 30 percent and 60 percent of the time, depending on the topic. More than 20 percent of the advice about breast-feeding from family members didn't match AAP recommendations.

Similarly, family advice related to pacifiers, where babies sleep and babies' sleep position went against the AAP recommendations two-thirds of the time, the study found.

"Families give inconsistent advice largely because they are not trained medical professionals and are basing their recommendations on personal anecdotal experience," Jones said.

Less than half of the mothers said they used media sources for advice except when it came to breastfeeding. Seventy percent reported their main source of advice on breastfeeding came from media sources; many of these sources were not consistent with AAP recommendations.

In addition, more than a quarter of the mothers who got advice about vaccines from the media received information that was not consistent with AAP recommendations.

"Mothers get inconsistent advice from the media, especially the Internet, because it is the Wild West with no regulation on content at all," Jones said.

The possible consequences of bad advice depend on the topic and the advice, Jones said.

"Not vaccinating your child against potentially life-threatening diseases like measles is an obvious example," he said. "Others may result in less risk of severe illness or injury but may still result in increased stress and anxiety, such as inappropriately demonizing the use of pacifiers while breast-feeding."

Mothers who look for information online should stick to sources such as the AAP, the American Academy of Family Physicians or the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Eisenberg suggested.

Even though some advice from doctors did not follow AAP recommendations entirely, Eisenberg and Jones agreed that doctors are the best source for mothers on the health and care of their children.

"While our findings suggest that there is room for improvement, we did find that health care providers were an important source of information, and the information was generally accurate," Eisenberg said. "But I would encourage parents to ask questions if they don't feel like their provider has been entirely clear, or if they have any questions about the recommendations."

The study was published in the July edition of the journal Pediatrics.

Source: Tara Haelle, http://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/news/20150727/new-moms-often-get-poor-advice-on-baby-care-study

 

Your Baby

High Lead Levels in Baby Bracelet

2:00

After an infant girl in Connecticut developed lead poisoning, the cause was found to be a bracelet made with lead beads. Doctors discovered that the 9-month-old had abnormally high blood lead levels during a routine checkup.

Her blood lead level was 41 micrograms per deciliter (ug/dL); anything over 5 ug/dL is considered abnormal, according to a recent report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Health investigators visited the infant’s home to try and determine where the lead originated. They found lead based paint on windows in the home; however, the child would not have been able to reach the windows. There were also 3 siblings in the house between 3-5 years old whose lead levels tests came back normal.

Investigators also found a homemade bracelet that the infant was given to chew on to relieve teething pain. The beads on the bracelet contained extremely high levels of lead; 17,000 parts per million (ppm). The amount of lead that's considered safe for children's products is 90 ppm or 100 ppm, depending on the type of product, according to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).

Investigators were unable to track down the manufacturer of the beads in the Connecticut case or the bracelet maker, according to the report.

In 2003 and 2006, there were several cases of severe lead poisoning and death linked to lead-containing jewelry and charms marketed to children, the report said. After these instances, the CPSC set limits on the amount of lead allowed in products marketed to kids, and each year, there are recalls of children's jewelry that exceed those limits. However, the limits do not apply to products that aren't intended for use by children, the report noted.

There's no safe amount of lead exposure for children, according to the CDC, and the toxic heavy metal can affect nearly every part of the body. In many cases, lead exposure can occur with no obvious symptoms. Symptoms of severe lead poisoning can include confusion, seizures, coma and death.

Lead in the body is distributed to the brain, liver, kidney and bones. It is stored in the teeth and bones, where it accumulates over time.

For severe cases of lead poisonings, doctors will sometimes recommend Chelation therapy or EDTA chelation therapy.

There are safe non-toxic ways to treat teething pain in infants. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) suggests using a chilled teething ring or “gently rubbing or massaging the gums with one of your fingers.”[3] However, there are safety concerns about plastic teething rings.  A 2015 study found chemicals that can affect the child’s hormones (also called endocrine-disrupting chemicals, or EDCs) in several types of plastic baby “teethers..”For this reason, parents may want to avoid using teethers made of any kind of plastic. While there are several non-plastic alternatives on the market which claim to be safe, some of these products may not have been adequately tested. In addition, some teething products could break or leak, presenting other safety concerns.

Safe ways to help your infant through the teething period include gum massage, a chilled spoon from the refrigerator (not the freezer!) to suck on, a chilled wet washcloth dipped in water, breast milk or chamomile tea to chew on, or chilled foods such as applesauce or yogurt to soothe pain.

Talk to your pediatrician first before applying any over-the-counter products for teething. Never put Lidocaine on your child’s gums.

In 2016, the FDA urged parents to avoid homeopathic teething rings that contain Belladonna. Belladonna comes from the deadly nightshade plant and can be poisonous.

The bottom line on easing teething pain in infants is to talk with your pediatrician about ways to help your little one can get through this sometimes challenging time.

Story sources: Sara G. Miller, https://www.livescience.com/60287-teething-bracelet-causes-lead-poisoning.html

 

 

 

Your Baby

Eating Fish During Pregnancy Benefits Baby’s Brain Development

2:00

Can eating more fish during pregnancy help babies’ brains function better as they grow older? Yes, according to a new study from Spain. The researchers say that mothers who eat three substantial servings of fish – each week- during pregnancy may be giving their children an advantage as they mature.

Researchers followed nearly 2,000 mother-child pairs from the first trimester of pregnancy through the child’s fifth birthday and found improved brain function in the kids whose mothers ate the most fish while pregnant, compared to children of mothers who ate the least.

Even when women averaged 600 grams, or 21 ounces, of fish weekly during pregnancy, there was no sign that mercury or other pollutants associated with fish were having a negative effect that offset the apparent benefits.

“Seafood is known to be an important source of essential nutrients for brain development, but at the same time accumulates mercury from the environment, which is known to be neurotoxic,” lead author Jordi Julvez, of the Center for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Barcelona, said in an email to Reuters Health.

This important health concern prompted the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to come up with a guideline for pregnant women in 2014. It encourages women to eat more fish during pregnancy, but limit the intake to no more than 12 ounces per week.

For this study, researchers analyzed data from the Spanish Childhood and Environment Project, a large population study that recruited women in their first trimester of pregnancy, in four provinces of Spain, between 2004 and 2008.

Julvez and colleagues focused on records of the women’s consumption of large fatty fish such as swordfish and albacore tuna, smaller fatty fish such as mackerel, sardines, anchovies or salmon, and lean fish such as hake or sole, as well as shellfish and other seafood.

Women were tested for blood levels of vitamin D and iodine, and cord blood was tested after delivery to measure fetal exposure to mercury and PCB pollutants. At ages 14 months and five years, the children underwent tests of their cognitive abilities and Asperger Syndrome traits to assess their neuropsychological development.

On average, the women had consumed about 500 g, or three servings, of seafood per week while pregnant. But with every additional 10 g per week above that amount, children’s test scores improved, up to about 600 g. The link between higher maternal consumption and better brain development in children was especially apparent when kids were five.

The researchers also saw a consistent reduction in autism-spectrum traits with increased maternal fish consumption.

Mothers’ consumption of lean fish and large fatty fish appeared most strongly tied to children’s scores, and fish intake during the first trimester, compared to later in pregnancy, also had the strongest associations.

“I think that in general people should follow the current recommendations,” Julvez said. “Nevertheless this study pointed out that maybe some of them, particularly the American ones, should be less stringent.”

Julvez noted that there didn’t appear to be any additional benefit when women ate more than 21 ounces (about 595 g) of fish per week.

“I think it's really interesting, and it shed a lot more light on the benefits of eating fish during pregnancy,” said Dr. Ashley Roman, director of Maternal Fetal Medicine at NYU Langone Medical Center in New York.

“I think what's interesting about this study compared to some data previously is that they better quantify the relationship between how much fish is consumed in a diet and then the benefits for the fetus and ultimately the child,” said Roman, who was not involved in the study.

Roman also noted that pregnant women should avoid certain fish such as tilefish, shark, swordfish and giant mackerel. These are larger fish with longer life spans that may accumulate more mercury in their tissue.

While fish may be a great source of protein and benefit brain development in utero, most experts agree that women should consult their obstetrician about what fish are safer to eat and how much they should eat during pregnancy.

The study was published online in the January edition of the American Journal of Epidemiology

Source: Shereen Lehman, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-pregnancy-fish-idUSKCN0UW1S4

 

 

 

Your Baby

Eating Chocolate While Pregnant May Improve Mom and Baby’s Health!

1:45

 Put another check in the win column for a reason to eat chocolate - as though anyone really needs one!

 A new study suggests that moms-to-be that eat a small piece of chocolate every day may improve their baby’s cardiovascular health and reduce the risk for preeclampsia.

 Researchers found that their findings held up regardless of whether the chocolate consumed contained high or low amounts of flavonoids, a group of phytochemicals that have antioxidant abilities. Various studies have also suggested that flavonoids may offer heart health benefits.

 As with most studies, the research did not prove that eating chocolate during pregnancy caused better circulatory health in pregnant women and their babies, only that there was an association.

 "Our observations suggest that a regular small consumption of dark chocolate -- whether or not the level of flavanol is high -- from the first trimester of pregnancy, could lead to an improvement of placental function," said study author Dr. Emmanuel Bujold. He is a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Universite Laval in Quebec City, Canada.

 Bujold's team decided to see whether differences in flavanol content had any effect on the pregnancies of nearly 130 women.

 All of the women in the study were at the 11- to 14-week mark of their pregnancy, and carrying one child.

 All were instructed to consume 30 grams of chocolate (a little more than one ounce) each day over a 12-week period. That's equivalent to about one small square of chocolate per day, Bujold said.

 Half of the women consumed high-flavanol chocolate, while the other half was given low-flavanol chocolate. All were then tracked until their delivery date.

 Regardless of which type of chocolate was consumed, the women faced the same risk for both preeclampsia and routine high blood pressure. Placental weight and birth weight was also the same in both groups, the investigators found.

 Similarly, fetal and placental blood circulation levels, as well as in-utero blood velocity, did not appear to be affected by shifting flavanol levels.

 However, simply consuming a small amount of chocolate -- no matter what the flavanol content -- was associated with notable improvements in all blood circulation and velocity measures compared to the general population, the researchers said.

 Bujold said this suggests that there's something about chocolate, apart from flavanol levels, that may exert a positive influence on the course of pregnancy. Finding out exactly what that is "could lead to improvement of women's and children's health, along with a significant reduction of treatment cost," he said.

 While that’s good news for chocolate lovers, Bujold cautions that pregnant women keep the portion small and calorie intake low.

 So, a bit of chocolate daily while pregnant is not going to hurt you, in fact it just may give you and your baby’s health a little boost.

 The findings were scheduled for presentation at the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine's annual meeting, in Atlanta. The data and conclusions should be viewed as preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

 Source:  Alan Mozes, http://consumer.healthday.com/vitamins-and-nutrition-information-27/food-and-nutrition-news-316/small-square-of-chocolate-each-day-during-pregnancy-may-help-mom-and-baby-707736.html

Pages

Please fill in your e-mail address to be included in our newsletter.
You may opt out at any time.

 

DR SUE'S DAILY DOSE

Why texture is important when introducing new food to your baby.

DR SUE'S DAILY DOSE

Why texture is important when introducing new food to your baby.

Please fill in your e-mail address to be included in our newsletter.
You may opt out at any time.

 

Please fill in your e-mail address to be included in our newsletter.
You may opt out at any time.