Observational studyThe American journal of clinical nutrition2025
Sugar restriction in the first 1000 days after conception, and long-term respiratory health: a quasi-experiment study.
Observational study in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sugar rationing in the first 1000 days of life and risk of frailty: evidence from a natural experiment.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh sugar intake during the first 1000 d after conception is common and may impact lifelong respiratory health. Although early-life sugar exposure has been linked to childhood asthma, its long-term effect on adult respiratory disease and lung function is unclear.
objectivesThis study aims to assess whether restricted sugar intake during the first 1000 d after conception is associated with risk and delayed onset of asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) in adulthood, and to explore potential mediating mechanisms.
methodsWe used the cessation of the United Kingdom's sugar rationing in September 1953 as a quasi-experiment, comparing 58,670 UK Biobank participants born 1951-1956 exposed to varying durations of early-life sugar restriction. Participants were classified as exposed (in utero and/or ≤2 y postbirth) or unexposed (born after July 1954). Outcomes included incident asthma, COPD, and IPF (ascertained by health records), validated in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (a United Kingdom cohort) and the Health and Retirement Study (a United States cohort). Spirometry indices [forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)%, forced vital capacity (FVC)%, FEV1/FVC] were measured. Cox models adjusted for demographic, socioeconomic, lifestyle, and clinical factors. Mediation analysis assessed diabetes, hypertension, and birth weight.
resultsEarly-life exposure to sugar rationing (in utero plus 1-2 y) was associated with lower risks of asthma [hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61, 0.91] and COPD [0.73 (0.62, 0.88)], and delayed disease onset by ≤3.6 y. Rationed participants had higher mean FEV1% (increase 6.0; 95% CI: 2.9, 9.1), FVC% [increase 5.9 (3.3, 8.5)], and FEV1/FVC ratio [increase 0.045 (0.011, 0.079)] compared with nonrationed groups. Longer sugar restriction offered greater protection. Diabetes and hypertension mediated 18.2% of the effect; birth weight contributed only 1.6%. Findings were consistent across external validation and placebo analyses.
conclusionsRestricting sugar intake during the first 1,000 d after conception was associated with reduced risk and delayed onset of asthma and COPD, and improved lung function in adulthood. These findings support the utility of current dietary guidelines to promote lifelong respiratory health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.