Research
Restricting sugar early significantly reduces risk of midlife chronic disease

A low-sugar diet in utero and in the first two years of life can meaningfully reduce the risk of chronic diseases in adulthood, a new study has found, providing compelling new evidence of the lifelong health effects of early-life sugar consumption.
Published in Science, the study finds that children who experienced sugar restrictions during their first 1,000 days after conception had up to 35 per cent lower risk of developing Type 2 diabetes and as much as 20 per cent less risk of hypertension as adults. Low sugar intake by the mother prior to birth was enough to lower risks, but continued sugar restriction after birth increased the benefits.
Taking advantage of an unintended “natural experiment” from World War II, researchers at the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, McGill University in Montreal, and the University of California, Berkeley, examined how sugar rationing during the war influenced long-term health outcomes.
The United Kingdom introduced limits on sugar distribution in 1942 as part of its wartime food rationing programme. Rationing ended in September 1953.
The researchers used contemporary data from the U.K. Biobank, a database of medical histories and genetic, lifestyle and other disease risk factors, to study the effect of those early-life sugar restrictions on health outcomes of adults conceived in the U.K. just before and after the end of wartime sugar rationing.
“Studying the long-term effects of added sugar on health is challenging,” says study corresponding author Tadeja Gracner, senior economist at the USC Dornsife Center for Economic and Social Research.
“It is hard to find situations where people are randomly exposed to different nutritional environments early in life and follow them for 50 to 60 years. The end of rationing provided us with a novel natural experiment to overcome these problems.”
Sugar intake during rationing was about 8 teaspoons (40 grammes) per day on average. When rationing ended, sugar and sweets consumption skyrocketed to about 16 teaspoons (80 grammes) per day.
Notably, rationing did not involve extreme food deprivation overall. Diets generally appeared to have been, in fact, within today’s guidelines set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the World Health Organization, which recommend no added sugars for children under two and not more than 12 teaspoons (50g) of added sugar daily for adults.
The immediate and large increase in sugar consumption but no other foods after rationing ended created an interesting natural experiment: Individuals were exposed to varying levels of sugar intake early in life, depending on whether they were conceived or born before or after September 1953.
Those conceived or born just before the end of rationing experienced sugar-scarce conditions compared to those born just after who were born into a more sugar-rich environment.
The researchers then identified those born around this time in the U.K. Biobank data collected over 50 years later. Using a very tight birth window around the end of sugar rationing allowed the authors to compare midlife health outcomes of otherwise similar birth cohorts.
While living through the period of sugar restriction during the first 1,000 days of life substantially lowered the risk of developing diabetes and hypertension, for those who were later diagnosed with either of those conditions, onset of disease was delayed by four years and two years, respectively.
Notably, exposure to sugar restrictions in utero alone was enough to lower risks, but disease protection increased postnatally once solids were likely introduced.
The magnitude of this effect is meaningful as it can save costs, extend life expectancy and, perhaps more importantly, quality of life, say the researchers.
In the United States, people with diabetes incur annual medical expenditures of about $12,000 on average. Further, earlier diagnosis of diabetes means significantly shorter life expectancy, with every decade earlier that a diagnosis of diabetes is made cutting three to four years off of life expectancy.
These numbers underscore the value of early interventions that could delay or prevent this disease, the researchers note.
Experts’ concerns about children’s long-term health as they consume excessive amounts of added sugars during their early life, a critical period of development, continue to mount. Adjusting child sugar consumption, however, is not easy — added sugar is everywhere, even in baby and toddler foods, and children are bombarded with TV ads for sugary snacks, say the researchers.
“Parents need information about what works, and this study provides some of the first causal evidence that reducing added sugar early in life is a powerful step towards improving children’s health over their lifetimes,” says study co-author Claire Boone of McGill University and the University of Chicago.
Co-author Paul Gertler of UC Berkeley and the National Bureau of Economics Research added: “Sugar early in life is the new tobacco, and we should treat it as such by holding food companies accountable to reformulate baby foods with healthier options and regulate the marketing and tax sugary foods targeted at kids.”
This study is the first of a larger research effort exploring how early-life sugar restrictions affected a broader set of economic and health outcomes in later adulthood, including education, wealth, and chronic inflammation, cognitive function and dementia.
News
NHS to review cost effectiveness of new Alzheimer’s drugs

NICE will review whether new Alzheimer’s drugs should be offered on the NHS after an appeal found their wider impact was not fully counted.
An appeal found that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence had failed to properly account for the wider impact of the treatments, including the heavy burden on unpaid carers, when calculating the cost effectiveness of the medicines.
Both treatments, lecanemab and donanemab, will now return to a NICE committee for further consideration.
“Today’s ruling is an opportunity for NICE to consider the real cost of Alzheimer’s on people and their families, and we welcome the decision to look again at whether new medicines could be provided on the NHS,” said David Thomas, head of policy and public affairs at Alzheimer’s Research UK.
Lecanemab and donanemab do not cure Alzheimer’s, but they slow it by targeting and clearing clumps of amyloid proteins, sticky protein build-ups in the brain linked to the disease.
While the drugs are available privately in the UK for people who can afford them, NICE ruled last year that they were too expensive to be made available on the NHS in England and Wales.
It is estimated informal dementia care costs the economy more than £20bn a year.
Alzheimer’s Research UK wants NICE to update how it assesses the value of new dementia drugs and factor in the huge additional costs this condition places on society and the wider economy.
NICE and its expert committees assess whether new drugs are good value for money for the NHS based on a wide range of evidence.
This includes how treatments perform in clinical trials, the experiences of patients and carers, and the costs of new drugs as well as any changes to NHS services needed to provide access.
When NICE weighs up whether a new Alzheimer’s drug is cost effective for the NHS, it carries out a limited assessment of the impact dementia has on the health of carers.
But the condition takes an enormous toll on families and society because caring for someone with dementia can lead people to become more isolated and give up work.
It can have a major emotional impact and put families under financial strain.
Thomas said: “Research has delivered new treatments with the potential to provide people with valuable extra months of independence, lessening the burden on carers.
“While these treatments offer modest benefits and can cause serious side effects, they provide the foundation for a future where dementia becomes a treatable condition.
“Now we need NICE to look again at how these medicines could benefit both people with early Alzheimer’s and their carers.”
Chris, whose mother Shirley is living with Alzheimer’s disease, said: “The real cost of Alzheimer’s is far greater than many people realise.
“In order to give my mum the care she needed, I moved back home to help my dad as the care was too much for him alone. After my dad passed away from Covid in 2021, I became sole carer for my mum.
“It was a very difficult period, working a full-time job, caring for Mum and dealing with the loss of my dad. Eventually I got some in-home care support to help.
“The family has borne most of the cost of Mum’s care, both in time and fees, and the family home has been sold to finance it.”
“The emotional and financial strain Alzheimer’s has taken on our family is horrendous, and I know many families across the UK are experiencing this pressure.”
He is backing Alzheimer’s Research UK’s call for NICE to change how it evaluates new dementia treatments.
The timeframe for the next NICE meetings to discuss the drugs is still to be set, and it is not certain follow-up hearings would change NICE’s guidance on access to the medicines.
But Alzheimer’s Research UK is continuing to push to make sure dementia is now a main priority for political and NHS decision-makers.
The head of the ongoing independent review into adult social care, Baroness Louise Casey, has called on the government to act, show leadership and prioritise dementia.
She has proposed appointing a dementia tsar to drive forward the prevention, treatment and care of dementia.
Baroness Casey has also argued for more funding for dementia treatment trials.
With more than 130 Alzheimer’s drugs in clinical trials worldwide, the charity says it is vital the NHS runs trials of new treatments now to understand how to deliver them to eligible patients in future.
In addition to changing how NICE assesses new medicines, the health service needs to collect real-world evidence on new dementia drugs and prepare for diagnostic tests and innovative treatments that are coming.
“Alzheimer’s Research UK is calling on the government to give dementia the same political determination that transformed cancer care,” Thomas said.
“We urgently need investment and a clear UK-wide plan so new treatments can be assessed in the NHS and reach the people who stand to benefit.”
Health and social care secretary Wes Streeting has said dementia is “one of the greatest challenges of our time” and pledged that the UK should become a world leader in dementia clinical trials.
News
Osteoporosis drugs could reduce dementia risk, study suggests
News
Gut health supplement relieves arthritis pain, research finds

A prebiotic fibre supplement may ease arthritis pain and improve grip strength in people with knee osteoarthritis, a study suggests.
The daily supplement, made from inulin, a dietary fibre found in chicory root, Jerusalem artichokes and other vegetables, also lowered pain sensitivity and saw fewer people drop out than a digital physiotherapy programme tested alongside it.
Dr Afroditi Kouraki, lead author of the study from the University of Nottingham, said: ‘Our findings suggest that targeting gut health with a prebiotic supplement is a safe, well-tolerated, and effective way to reduce pain in people with knee osteoarthritis.
“The very low dropout rate compared to the exercise group is also encouraging from a public health perspective, people were able to fit this supplement easily into their daily lives.’
Osteoarthritis of the knee, a wear-and-tear joint condition, affects hundreds of millions of people worldwide and is a leading cause of pain and disability, particularly in older adults.
Current treatments rely heavily on pain medication, which can cause side effects, or exercise programmes, which many patients find hard to maintain.
The INSPIRE trial, led by researchers at the University of Nottingham, involved 117 adults with knee osteoarthritis and tested four groups: inulin alone, digital physiotherapy-supported exercise alone, a combination of both, and a placebo. Both inulin and physiotherapy independently reduced knee pain.
However, inulin alone improved grip strength and reduced pain sensitivity, measures linked to how the nervous system processes pain, while physiotherapy did not.
The dropout rate for those taking the supplement was just 3.6 per cent, compared with 21 per cent for the physiotherapy group, suggesting a daily supplement may be easier for people to stick with than an exercise programme.
Inulin works as a prebiotic, meaning it feeds beneficial bacteria in the gut.
This leads to the production of compounds called short-chain fatty acids, particularly butyrate, which can affect inflammation and pain pathways throughout the body.
Participants taking inulin also showed increased levels of both butyrate and GLP-1, a gut hormone linked to pain regulation and muscle health.
Higher GLP-1 levels were associated with improved grip strength, pointing to a possible gut-muscle connection.
Senior author Professor Ana Valdes added: ‘The link we observed between GLP-1 and grip strength is particularly intriguing and points to a broader gut-muscle-pain axis that warrants further investigation. This could have implications not just for osteoarthritis, but for understanding how gut health influences ageing and physical resilience more broadly.’
Professor Lucy Donaldson, director of research at Arthritis UK, said: “The pain of arthritis can severely impact quality of life. Our recent lived experience survey showed that six in ten people are living in pain most or all of the time due to their arthritis.
“Researchers are starting to explore the role of the gut microbiome in our experience of pain.
“This exciting preliminary research highlights how diet and physiotherapy can act in different ways to have benefits for people with arthritis.
“We know a variety and balance of healthy foods, including fibre, and regular physical activity matter, and we’re glad to be supporting research that explores how they work to help people with arthritis.”













