During World War II, the United Kingdom imposed strict rationing. Starting in January 1940, foods like sugar, meat, and cheese were limited due to the wartime shortage. Rationing lasted until September 1953, which meant for more than a decade babies born during this period consumed a diet much lower in sugar than those born before or after. It turns out this enforced change in diet profoundly impacted these babies’ long-term health, a new study shows.
Published Thursday in the journal Science, a new study examined health data from those born during and after rationing. The authors, from the University of Southern California, McGill University, and the University of California, Berkeley, used the UK Biobank, which possesses genetic and health information on over half a million people. By looking at Brits born between October 1951 and March 1956, the team determined that those who lived their earliest years out during sugar rationing had a markedly lower risk for chronic conditions like diabetes and high blood pressure in middle age, which conveys how exposure to sugar during infancy can influence health decades later.
By analyzing data on over 60,000 people, the researchers found that those who lived through sugar rationing had a 35 percent lower risk of diabetes and a 20 percent lower risk of high blood pressure in middle age. This group also showed delayed onset of diabetes by 4 years and high blood pressure by 2 years. On the other hand, those who grew up without rationing had higher disease rates. Even sugar consumption during pregnancy affects health later in life. The authors found that in-utero sugar rationing on its own made up about one-third of the risk reduction.
One possibility behind this finding is that where sugar fits in with early life can influence how much sugar someone eats years later. First author Tadeja Gračner, an economist at the University of Southern California, told the New York Times that early exposure to sugar can create a lifelong habit. Disease risk, then, is “a cumulative response” to decades of sugar consumption, she says.
But these results don’t call for total elimination of refined sugars. Even moderately cutting back can significantly reduce risk in both pregnant people and babies. Tadeja Gračner, an economist at the University of Southern California and the study’s first author, told Nature that “it’s all about moderation.”
