Omega-3 fatty acids, which are found in fish, soybeans and certain nuts and seeds, are considered healthy in part because they can encourage resolution of inflammation in the body. Omega-6 fatty acids, primarily found in vegetable oils, have mixed effects on health but generally promote inflammation.

In a new study, published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, researchers from Johns Hopkins University looked at 135 children, ages 5-12 (average age: 9.5), with asthma.

Roughly a third of the children had mild asthma, a third moderate and a third severe asthma. Ninety-six percent of the children were African American, and 47% were girls.

The children’s diet, daily asthma symptoms and asthma medication use were assessed for one week at enrolment and again for one week at three and six months.

During the same time periods, the investigators measured two types of home indoor particulate pollution, PM 2.5 and PM 10, which are known asthma triggers and lead to increased symptoms in children with asthma. Invisible to the naked eye, PM 2.5 penetrates deeply into the lungs, reaching the tiny air sacs, or alveoli. PM 10 includes particles larger than PM 2.5, but still with a diameter of one-sixth the width of a human hair or less. When inhaled, these larger particles are deposited along the airways.

Monitoring symptoms

Analysis showed that children with higher levels of omega-3 in their diets had less severe asthma and fewer symptoms in response to higher levels of indoor particulate air pollution. Conversely, children with higher levels of omega-6 in their diets had more severe asthma and more symptoms in response to higher levels of indoor particulate matter pollution.

“There is mounting evidence that diet, particularly omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids, may play a role in lung health,” said Emily P. Brigham, MD, MHS, lead study author and assistant professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins University.

“Many children in the U.S., including those in Baltimore City [Maryland], where we conducted our research, consume a diet that deviates sharply from national guidelines. Typically, this means they are eating low amounts of omega-3, and higher amounts of omega-6,” said Dr Brigham, adding that paediatric asthma rates in the city are more than twice the national average.

“Because children with asthma are already prone to inflammation and respiratory symptoms, we wanted to see if these fatty acids could be further contributing to their disease severity and symptoms in response to indoor air pollution, which is often elevated in inner-city homes.”

The study also found that higher levels of omega-6 in the children’s diet correlated with higher percentages of neutrophils (a type of white blood cell linked with inflammation) in response to particulate pollution.

Don’t underestimate diet’s impact

The study did have some limitations. The children’s intake of the fatty acids was self-reported by the children, with help from parents, using a dietary questionnaire specifically designed for residents of Baltimore City. Because the study was observational rather than a randomized, controlled trial, the researchers could not prove cause and effect or rule out other factors that may have contributed to relationships noted with asthma health.

Nevertheless, the researchers believe their study highlights the potential importance of diet to a population that experiences high rates of asthma.

“If there is a causal relationship between diet and asthma, a healthier diet may protect children with asthma, particularly minority children living in the inner city, from some of the harmful effects of air pollution,” Dr Brigham said. “Among vulnerable populations, we may find that improving diet and air pollution together has the greatest impact on asthma health.”

The findings of independent laboratory tests commissioned by Environmental Working Group (EWG) in the US, fgollow swiftly on the heels of a California jury awarding $289 million to a school groundskeeper who claimed Roundup gave him  lymphoma.

EWG’s tests found glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, in all but two of 45 samples of products made with conventionally grown oats. More than two thirds of the samples had glyphosate levels above what EWG scientists consider protective of children’s health with an adequate margin of safety.

Glyphosate has been linked to cancer by California state scientists and the World Health Organization. The California case that ended Friday was the first of reportedly thousands of lawsuits against Monsanto. These suits have been brought by farm workers and others who allege that they developed cancer from years of exposure to Roundup.

Children at risk

“No one wants to eat a weed killer for breakfast, and no one should have to do so.” said EWG President Ken Cook.

“We will petition the Environmental Protection Agency to do its job and end uses of glyphosate that resulted in the contamination we report today,” Cook said. “But we very much doubt our petition will be acted upon by President Trump’s lawless EPA. So we’re calling on the companies to make these iconic products with clean ingredients.”

EWG’s findings raise the prospect that millions of American children are being exposed to a suspected carcinogen at a time when their bodies are rapidly developing.

“It is very troubling that cereals children like to eat contain glyphosate,” said Alexis Temkin, Ph.D., EWG toxicologist and author of the report.  “Parents shouldn’t worry about whether feeding their children healthy oat foods will also expose them to a chemical linked to cancer. The government must take steps to protect our most vulnerable populations.”

About one-third of 16 samples of foods made with organically grown oats also had glyphosate, all at levels well below EWG’s health benchmark. Glyphosate may get in organic oats by drifting from nearby farm fields, or cross-contamination in a processing facility that also handles non-organic foods.

The EPA has denied that glyphosate may increase the risk of cancer. Documents introduced in the California trial showed how the agency and Monsanto worked together to promote the claim that the chemical is safe.

Time to review

EWG is urging the EPA to review all evidence linking glyphosate to increased cancer risk and other adverse health effects in human and animal studies. The EPA should limit the use of glyphosate on food crops, including the practice of applying it as a desiccant to dry drop out prior to harvesting.

In the UK last year traces of glyphosate were found in samples of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream – most likely from the cereal ingredients they contained.

With the release of the findings, EWG launched a consumer petition to press companies to eliminate glyphosate from food. The organization said suppliers need to stop using glyphosate before harvesting oats and other grains. Click here to sign the petition.

Natural Health News — Women who take fish oil supplements and probiotics in later pregnancy may reduce their child’s risk of food allergy and eczema, according to new research.

In one of the largest ever research reports of how a pregnant woman’s diet affects her baby’s allergy and eczema risk, scientists from London’s Imperial College assessed over 400 studies involving 1.5 million people.

As part of the study, they found that when pregnant women took a daily fish oil capsule from 20 weeks pregnant, and during the first three to four months of breastfeeding, risk of egg allergy in the child was reduced by 30%.

The team also found that taking a daily probiotic supplement from 36-38 weeks pregnant, and during the first three to six months of breastfeeding, reduced the risk of a child developing eczema by 22%.

The researchers, who published their meta-analysis in the journal PLOS Medicine, found no evidence that avoiding potentially allergenic foods such as nuts, dairy and eggs during pregnancy made a difference to a child’s allergy or eczema risk.

Dr Robert Boyle, lead author of the research from the Department of Medicine at Imperial College London, explained: “Food allergies and eczema in children are a growing problem across the world. Although there has been a suggestion that what a woman eats during pregnancy may affect her baby’s risk of developing allergies or eczema, until now there has never been such a comprehensive analysis of the data.”

He added: “Our research suggests probiotic and fish oil supplements may reduce a child’s risk of developing an allergic condition, and these findings need to be considered when guidelines for pregnant women are updated.”

The team also assessed a host of dietary factors during pregnancy including fruit, vegetable and vitamin intake, but found no clear evidence that any of these affected allergy or eczema risk.

Allergies, eczema still not well understood

Allergies to foods, such as nuts, egg, milk or wheat, affect around one in 20 children in the UK. They are caused by the immune system malfunctioning and over-reacting to these harmless foods. This triggers symptoms such as rashes, swelling, vomiting and wheezing.

Eczema affects around one in five children in the UK, and causes dry, cracked and itchy skin. The causes of eczema and allergies are not fully understood, but allergies are more common in people who suffer from eczema.

More research is now needed to understand how probiotics and fish oils may reduce allergy and eczema risk, said Dr Vanessa Garcia-Larsen, co-author of the study from the National Heart and Lung Institute at Imperial: “Despite allergies and eczema being on the rise, and affecting millions of children, we are still hunting for the root causes of these conditions, and how to prevent them.”

Dr Garcia-Larsen added: “This study has provided clues, which we now need to follow with further research.”

Significant benefits

In the current study, the team assessed 28 trials of probiotic supplements during pregnancy, involving around 6,000 women. Probiotics contain live bacteria that may influence the natural balance of bugs in the gut. Previous research has linked a disruption in naturally-occurring bacteria to allergy risk.

In the research, probiotics were taken during pregnancy and breastfeeding as a capsule, powder or drink (most yogurts do not contain enough probiotic). They were found to reduce the risk of a child developing eczema – between the ages of six months to three years – by 22%. This is the equivalent of 44 cases of eczema per 1000 children.

The scientists added that the probiotics, which mostly contained a bacterium called Lactobacillus rhamnosus, were not used in early pregnancy.

The team also assessed around 19 trials of fish oil supplements during pregnancy, involving around 15,000 people. These studies revealed a 30% reduction in risk of egg allergy by age one, which equates to a reduction of 31 cases of egg allergy per 1000 children. Egg allergy was tested with a skin test, where a tiny amount of egg is pricked onto the skin.

In the studies using fish oil supplements, the capsules contained a standard dose of omega-3 fatty acids (another type of fatty acid, called omega-6, was not found to have any effect on allergy risk).

Dr Boyle added that previous research suggests fish oils may help dampen down the immune system, and prevent it from over-reacting.

Most of the trials used supplements, although one involved eating oily fish, and a few others used non-fish oils such as nut oils. The Department of Health advises women to eat no more than two portions of oily fish a week, and to avoid shark, swordfish or marlin as these contain high levels of mercury.

The team also found that taking fish oil supplements during pregnancy reduced the child’s risk of peanut allergy by 38%. However they caution this finding was based only on two studies, and not as reliable as the egg allergy and eczema results.

Breastfeeding gives kids an immune boost too

The study also revealed some evidence for links between longer duration of breast feeding and a reduced risk of eczema, and breastfeeding was also linked with a lower risk of type one diabetes.

The findings of this study, funded by the Food Standards Agency, are being considered by the Government alongside the wider evidence base on infant feeding and the introduction of solids. As part of the cross-government review of complementary feeding, the risks and benefits associated with the timing of introduction of allergenic foods will also be considered.

The UK Food Standards Agency, which funded the study, advises that families should continue to follow the current Government advice to exclusively breastfeed for around the first six months of age, and continue breastfeeding thereafter. Solid foods should be introduced into the infant diet at around six months of age. Pregnant women should also continue to follow government dietary and supplement advice.

With regard to maternal and infant diets the review concludes that “current infant feeding guidance needs revision” and add that “guideline committees will need to carefully consider the key findings together with an evaluation of the safety, acceptability, and cost implications of advising probiotic or fish oil supplementation for pregnant and lactating women”.

According to a review published in Endocrine Connections rising levels of chemical production has led to “widespread environmental chemical contamination.” The researchers from the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université Paris-Sorbonne, further warn that current public health policy “does not fully address the risks to vulnerable populations.”

Widespread environmental contamination

Maternal thyroid hormones are essential for normal brain development of children and previous human studies have indicated that even moderate disruption to these hormones in pregnant women may affect cognitive development (e.g. IQ and mental abilities) and increase the risk of brain developmental disorders in their children.

In recent decades, an increase in chemical production has led to widespread environmental chemical contamination that can affect normal hormone function in those exposed, particularly in vulnerable populations, such as children and pregnant women.

Many of these identified endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), which include pesticides as well as chemicals used in the manufacture of drugs, cosmetics, furniture and plastics, have been reported to interfere with thyroid hormone function.

The authors further highlight that complex mixtures of these thyroid-disrupting chemicals are present in all humans, including children and pregnant women.

The risk is real

Lead researcher Prof Barbara Demeneix says that having reviewed data on pregnant women’s exposure to these chemicals, her team is convinced that the risk is real and that the data provide “a plausible link to the recent increased incidence of neurodevelopmental conditions, including autism spectrum disorders and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders.”

Prof Demeneix continues, “Many experts in the field, consider that the current testing guidelines for thyroid-disrupting chemicals are not sufficiently sensitive, do not take into account recent findings and do not adequately consider risks to vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women.”

It shows that too often manufacturers add unnecessary ingredients with no proven benefits – so that they can charge a premium price for their products. While it is legal, such practices are unethical and in breach of a voluntary World Health Organization code on the marketing of breastmilk substitutes.

There is no question that exclusively breastfeeding your baby for the first 6 months of life – a practice recommended by every health organisation in the world – provides your baby with everything it needs to grow and thrive. Not just nutrition, but hundreds of non-nutrient factors which cannot be synthesised in the lab and which help protect against illness and promote optimal growth.

Formula you can trust?

Nevertheless there are women who choose not to breastfeed and a very small percentage physically can’t breastfeed. For these women and their babies, being able to trust that infant formula is providing the best possible nutrition is very important.

The new report by non-profit, UK-based Changing Markets Foundation challenges the idea that wide ranges of formula brands, each with different added ingredients do not cater to mothers’ or babies’ needs but instead exist purely to create a fear based market where mothers will pay a premium for certain brands.

Higher prices

The report analysed the retail prices that companies around the world charge for infant formula.

The market, it seems, charges whatever it can get away with and this practice is highlighted by the fact that the same brands that may sell for wildly different prices in different parts of the world.

The most expensive products were found in China and Hong Kong, where families can spend US $286 and US $304 per month to feed a 2-3-month old baby, respectively, based on using the most expensive product in those markets.

Chinese mothers are still reeling from a scandal in which toxic melamine was added to cheap formulas to make them appear as if they had more protein in them than they did. Many infants were made ill and some died from drinking the adulterated formula.

This was in 2008, but many mothers still seek Western brands believing that they are better, or purer, than Chinese brands. Western brands capitalise on this fear by charging exorbitant prices for their products.

As a result, parents in China can spend up to 40% of their average salary on infant formula. In comparison, the most expensive formula in European countries will only cost 1-3% of an average salary.

Closer to breastmilk?

Another industry tactic identified in the report is the creation of different and more expensive varieties of formula with extra ingredients. These formulas with added fats, pre- and probiotics and certain nutrients, claim to make formula closer to breastmilk, to represent the latest developments in nutritional science, to satisfy hungrier babies, promote better digestion, and to aid sleep.

But, says the report, “There is little nutritional science and few beneficial health considerations behind their extensive product ranges.”

Social media spying

The report also highlighted the extent to which formula companies listen in on mothers’ social media posts in order to learn what they hope for – and what they fear – and then tailor their marketing outreach around that.

Infant formula manufacturers are very open about how they use internet platforms such as Facebook, as well as online mother and baby clubs (many of which are financed by formula manufacturers in the first place), to collect vital information on mothers, and to portray themselves as trusted ‘friends’ on the ‘mother’s journey’ in order to sell their products.

“Our report found that instead of nutritional science, companies are basing their selling strategies on market research and consumer preferences,” said Nusa Urbancic from Changing Markets Foundation.

“Product differentials are carefully and deliberately designed to appeal to the tastes and lifestyle preferences of parents, or their natural desire to give their babies the best possible start in life. As such, manufacturers can package these products in ‘premium’ ranges and charge high prices accordingly.”

Changes needed

The report calls for a comprehensive overhaul of global infant milk products and the introduction of stricter regulation, so that only those products based on unequivocal scientific advice and with the highest quality of nutritional ingredients are sold.

It also calls on governments to introduce and enforce national legislation that fully implements the WHO marketing Code and to ensure that the safety and nutritional quality and completeness of products is regularly verified.

• The report, Milking it, along with its executive summary, can be downloaded here.
• To coincide with the report Sum Of Us, the global online campaigning platform, has launched a petition calling for Nestlé to make sure their infant milks are safe, nutritionally complete and based on science. You can sign on and share at this link.

The study, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, evaluated mothers and children in Mexico and tested the children twice for cognitive development over the course of 12 years.

Fluoride is not added to public water supplies in Mexico, but people are exposed through naturally occurring fluoride in water and fluoridated salt and supplements.

The study looked at 287 mother-child pairs in Mexico City that were part of the Early Life Exposures in Mexico to Environmental Toxicants (ELEMENT) project, which recruited pregnant women from 1994 to 2005 and has continued to follow the women and their children ever since.

Even after adjusting for other influential factors, the problems with fluoride persisted. When the researchers analysed how levels of fluoride in urine related to the children’s verbal, perceptual-performance, quantitative, memory, and motor abilities at age four, and once more between the ages of six and 12, they found a drop in scores on intelligence tests for every 0.5 milligram-per-litre increase in fluoride exposure beyond 0.8 milligrams per litre found in urine.

Although the researchers found a link to a child’s exposure to fluoride in utero, they found no significant influence from fluoride exposure on brain development once a child was born.

The University of Toronto researchers who conducted the study say this is the first study of its kind and size to examine fluoride exposure and multiple states of neurodevelopment.

Pre-natal exposure is more dangerous

“Our study shows that the growing fetal nervous system may be adversely affected by higher levels of fluoride exposure,” said Dr. Howard Hu, the study’s principal investigator and Professor of Environmental Health, Epidemiology and Global Health at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health. “It also suggests that the pre-natal nervous system may be more sensitive to fluoride compared to that of school-aged children.”

Tap water and dental products have been fluoridated in communities in Canada and the United States (as well as milk and table salt in some other countries) by varying amounts for more than 60 years to prevent cavities and improve bone health. In that time other countries, like the UK,  have begun fluoridating their water. In recent years, fierce debate over the safety of water fluoridation — particularly for children’s developing brains — has prompted researchers to explore the issue and provide evidence to inform national drinking water standards.

There are some known side effects of fluoride, for example dental defects like mild staining are common among those ingesting recommended levels of fluoride in the United States and Canada. Skeletal fluorosis — excessive accumulation of fluoride in the bones — is much less common and only observed at levels of fluoride in the water that are more than 5 to 10 times higher than those recommended.

Toxic levels similar to US and Canada

“Relatively little is known, with confidence, about fluoride’s impact on neurodevelopment,” said Hu.

This latest study is significant, Hu says “because previous studies estimated exposures based on neighbourhood measurements of drinking water fluoride levels, which are indirect and much less precise measures of exposure.  They also looked at children’s exposures instead of prenatal exposures or had much smaller sample sizes of subjects to study”

With regard to the study’s implications for populations in North America, researchers found that urinary fluoride levels in pregnant women were somewhat higher than, but within the general range of, those levels seen in non-pregnant general populations in Canada and the United States.

“The potential risks associated with fluoride should be further studied, particularly among vulnerable populations such as pregnant women and children, and more research on fluoride’s impact on the developing brain is clearly needed,” said Hu.

• For more on this topic see our article:Q&A: What’s so bad about fluoride?

One concept gaining momentum in this realm is green schoolyards. But what is a green schoolyard?

A new report, “Green Schoolyards Support Healthy Bodies, Minds and Communities,” that explores the concept of a green schoolyard was presented ahead of publication as this week’s American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference & Exhibition in Chicago.

“Green schoolyards can include outdoor classrooms, native gardens, storm water capture, traditional play equipment, vegetable gardens, trails, trees and more,” says Stephen Pont, at Dell Children’s Texas Center and an assistant professor of Pediatrics at UT-Austin Dell Medical School.

“And outside of school time, these schoolyards can be open for the surrounding community to use, benefitting everyone.”

Nature – “Vitamin N”

Green schoolyards offer an opportunity for children to experience a healthy outdoor environment as part of their daily lives. After school hours, they provide value to the entire community through improved health, higher rates of community and family engagement, and increased opportunities for active outdoor play and relaxation.

“Too many children have no access to quality school grounds. In many neighbourhoods, the standard play space is a barren asphalt playground or a concrete slab surrounded by chain link fence – a completely unsuitable environment for children’s play.” says Richard Louv, Co-Founder of the Children & Nature Network.

For this study, researchers summarised the growing body of peer-reviewed scientific literature documenting green schoolyard benefits to academic outcomes, beneficial play, physical activity, and mental health.

To date, the research on the benefits of green schoolyards has enabled 5 cities to implement such projects in collaboration with the Children & Nature Network and the National League of Cities. These include Austin, Texas; Grand Rapids, Michigan; San Francisco, California; Providence, Rhode Island; and Madison, Wisconsin.

“So many physicians and health professionals choose to spend their free time in nature, but we often forget that nature can be a powerful health intervention for our patients, both for the prevention and improvement of many medical conditions,” says Dr. Pont. “We should all be champions for kids and families getting more Vitamin N.”

• For more on this topic see A ‘dose’ of nature – just what the doctor ordered and Get kids outdoors to prevent nearsightedness

Pesticide Action Network UK (PAN-UK) says the pesticides have documented potential to harm human health, especially the health of young children who are particularly vulnerable to their impacts.

For the report, Food for Thought, PAN-UK analysed the last 12 years of residue data published by the Expert Committee on Pesticide Residues in Food (PRiF) and found that there are unacceptable levels of pesticides present in the free produce supplied to four to six-year olds under the Department of Health’s School Fruit and Vegetable Scheme.

Since 2004, the Department of Health (DoH) has sought to promote healthy eating by providing one piece of fruit or vegetable every school day to children aged four to six years in England. The School Fruit and Vegetable Scheme (SFVS) reaches about 2.3 million children in 16,300 schools and costs about £40m a year.

Multiple residues

The report is bad news for parents and for children who are soon to return to school after the summer holidays. Residues of 123 different pesticides were found, some of which are linked to serious health problems such as cancer and disruption of the hormone system.

The UK government argues that levels found were within official ‘safe’ limits, but this ignores the fact that in many cases, multiple residues were found on the produce. This is another area of serious concern as the scientific community has little understanding about the complex interaction of different chemicals in what is termed the ‘cocktail’ effect.

The report also found that the levels of residues contained on SFVS produce – specifically apples, bananas and raisins – are higher than those in produce tested under the national residue testing scheme i.e. the mainstream produce found on supermarket shelves.

It’s not clear why this should be. The most commonly found residue was the fungicide imazalil, which is linked to developmental problems and may be carcinogenic. Its use is discouraged by the Fairtrade scheme which covers most mainstream bananas in UK supermarkets. However bananas in the SFVS scheme are not Fairtrade, which may explain the difference.

In addition only around 30% of the produce is supplied from UK growers. This is understandable with bananas, less so with apples.

PAN UK would like to see more produce sourced from the UK and, specifically, from organic growers. The additional costs, according to its analysis, are not restrictive – approximately 1p per day per child. The benefits in terms of helping to grow the UK organic sector and protecting young children from the effects of pesticides are priceless.

An unacceptable risk

We have previously reported on the risks of consuming pesticides.

In 2016 an EU wide report from the Europe food Safety Authority found that as much as 46.3% of the analysed food contained residue from at least one pesticide.

In 2014 French health and environmental group Générations Futures launched the third in a series of reports which showed that young children living and/or attending school in agricultural areas had an average of 21 residues of endocrine disrupting pesticides in samples of their hair.

In 2012 the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a new policy statement acknowledging children’s unique vulnerability to pesticides and saying that children should have as little exposure to pesticides as possible.

Recently a study of more than 500,000 births to women living in a farming region of California found that those who were the most exposed to pesticides experienced a 5-9% increase in problems such as premature births and abnormalities.

“Our aim is not to alarm parents but they do have a right to know what chemicals are in the food being given to their children,” said Nick Mole at PAN. “While we applaud the DoH’s efforts to get children eating more fruit and vegetables, our research shows that the produce they are being given is generally worse than on the supermarket shelves. Given how little it would cost to switch the scheme to organic, the government shouldn’t be putting our children’s health at risk.”

Click to enlarge [Table courtesy PAN-UK]

Click to enlarge [Table courtesy PAN-UK]

Click to enlarge [Table courtesy PAN-UK]

In the past, scientists have concentrated their search for the source of breastmilk’s antibacterial properties on the proteins it contains. But researchers at Vanderbilt University in the US have discovered that some of the carbohydrates in human milk have important antibacterial properties.

“This is the first example of generalised, antimicrobial activity on the part of the carbohydrates in human milk,” said Assistant Professor of Chemistry Steven Townsend, who directed the study. “One of the remarkable properties of these compounds is that they are clearly non-toxic, unlike most antibiotics.”

The results of the investigation were presented at the recent annual meeting of the American Chemical Society in Washington DC and are published in the journal Infectious Diseases.

Antimicrobial properties

What motivated the research was the growing problem of bacterial resistance to antibiotics, which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates causes 23,000 deaths annually.

“We started to look for different methods to defeat infectious bacteria. For inspiration, we turned to one particular bacteria, Group B Strep. We wondered whether its common host, pregnant women, produces compounds that can either weaken or kill strep, which is a leading cause of infections in newborns worldwide,” Townsend said.

Instead of searching for proteins in human milk with antimicrobial properties, Townsend and his colleagues turned their attention to the sugars, which are considerably more difficult to study.

“For most of the last century, biochemists have argued that proteins are most important and sugars are an afterthought. Most people have bought into that argument, even though there’s no data to support it,” Townsend said. “Far less is known about the function of sugars and, as a trained glycoprotein chemist, I wanted to explore their role.”

Beneficial sugars

To do so, the researchers collected human milk carbohydrates, also called oligosaccharides, from a number of different donor samples and profiled them with a mass spectrometry technique that can identify thousands of large biomolecules simultaneously. Then they added the compounds to strep cultures and observed the result under the microscope. This showed that not only do some of these oligosaccharides kill the bacteria directly but some also physically break down the biofilms that the bacteria form to protect themselves.

“Our results show that these sugars have a one-two punch,” said Townsend. “First, they sensitise the target bacteria and then they kill them. Biologists sometimes call this ‘synthetic lethality’ and there is a major push to develop new antimicrobial drugs with this capability.”

The carbohydrates in breastmilk, say the researchers can act on their own, but also enhance the effectiveness of the antibacterial proteins also present.

The next step, they say is to identify which of these natural sugars is the most effective. It’s a big ask; breastmilk contains over 200 unique sugars.