Traditional foods vs. manufactured baby foods

Abstract

The provision of nutrient-dense complementary foods is essential to ensure an infant's nutrient requirements are met. Yet often, relative to recommendations, traditional complementary foods have low levels of nutrients, suggesting a role, for fortified manufactured baby foods, in ensuring dietary adequacy. In this review, the potential benefits and safety of using fortified manufactured baby foods versus traditional foods alone are evaluated based on evidence from food composition data, diet modeling and intervention studies. Results from the food composition data and diet modeling suggest that ensuring a nutritionally adequate complementary feeding diet based on traditional foods alone is difficult. Conversely, except for biochemical iron status, intervention trials do not show consistent benefits, for growth or biochemical zinc or riboflavin status, with the use of fortified manufactured baby foods versus traditional foods alone. The safety of manufactured baby foods will depend on food preparation practices and the presence of effective governmental regulatory infrastructures. Hence, in environments where fortified manufactured baby foods are expensive, unavailable or where there is an absence of effective governmental regulatory infrastructures, the use of traditional foods is advised. Conversely, where affordable manufactured baby foods are available, marketed safely and fortified appropriately, their use is likely to result in improved nutrient intakes and infant biochemical iron status. In all environments, the promotion of breastfeeding, active feeding and high levels of hygiene is essential to ensure optimal nutritional status.