Wondering if anyone has opinions or counterpoints to the studies published about "significantly lower bone density" in infants fed a formula containing palm olein.
First, don't discount the long-term effects of prenatal diet.
Second, these are two singular studies with small sample populations. It would be interesting to see further studies, but these studies alone don't make me question what I'm feeding my son (Enfamil Gentlease).
Third, as my son approaches the one year mark, bone density will become more important, but his diet will become more varied and as his mother I will ensure that he eats a balanced diet full of calcium which promotes bone growth.
I understand that formula is a bugaboo for some, but for others it's really the only option. What matters is long term nutrition and diet, and formula is really only part of your child's diet for the first year.
I didn't mean to make it sound like all formula is bad. My son gets formula. I am questioning the brand I am feeding my son though. I do know there is not some crazy epidemic of bone density issues in infants, so its doubtful that palm olein oil makes that big an issue to calcium absorption.
I read somewhere (can't find the article now) that these two studies were interesting enough for the AAP to take notice.
Re: Palm olein in formulas and calcium absorbtion/bone density
sample, only 22 infants.
I can't tell the sample population in the first study
Also, the first study followed infants until 6 mo. The second study didn't say how long they followed infants for.
I don't think there is enough Information to say either way