婴儿母乳喂养的创新:从过去到未来。

Berthold Koletzko
{"title":"婴儿母乳喂养的创新:从过去到未来。","authors":"Berthold Koletzko","doi":"10.1159/000318944","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Innovation is important for life science and economy, but the value of innovation for public health depends on its impact on promoting health. Breastfeeding is not innovative but evolved slowly over 250-300 million years, yet its total benefits are not surpassed by more innovative ways of infant feeding. Until the 19th century, infants fed inadequate breast milk substitutes suffered from high mortality. In 1865 a major improvement was von Liebig's 'soup for infants', the first breast milk substitute based on chemical human milk analysis, soon followed by commercial applications. Other early innovations include whey protein-dominant formula, addition of specific carbohydrates to promote bifidobacteria ('prebiotic') and of live bacteria ('probiotic'), predecessors of apparently recent innovations. Opportunities for innovations exist since many outcomes in formula-fed infants do not match those in breastfed populations. Of concern, expected economic benefits through innovations may override scientific arguments. Business and marketing desires must be counterbalanced by independent pediatric and scientific evaluation. Developing innovations with relevant outcome effects is complex, costly and cannot be expected to occur every few years. Cooperation between academic investigators, small and medium enterprises with high innovative potential, and large industries promotes progress and should be facilitated, e.g. by public research funding.</p>","PeriodicalId":87412,"journal":{"name":"Nestle Nutrition workshop series. Paediatric programme","volume":"66 ","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000318944","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Innovations in infant milk feeding: from the past to the future.\",\"authors\":\"Berthold Koletzko\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000318944\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Innovation is important for life science and economy, but the value of innovation for public health depends on its impact on promoting health. Breastfeeding is not innovative but evolved slowly over 250-300 million years, yet its total benefits are not surpassed by more innovative ways of infant feeding. Until the 19th century, infants fed inadequate breast milk substitutes suffered from high mortality. In 1865 a major improvement was von Liebig's 'soup for infants', the first breast milk substitute based on chemical human milk analysis, soon followed by commercial applications. Other early innovations include whey protein-dominant formula, addition of specific carbohydrates to promote bifidobacteria ('prebiotic') and of live bacteria ('probiotic'), predecessors of apparently recent innovations. Opportunities for innovations exist since many outcomes in formula-fed infants do not match those in breastfed populations. Of concern, expected economic benefits through innovations may override scientific arguments. Business and marketing desires must be counterbalanced by independent pediatric and scientific evaluation. Developing innovations with relevant outcome effects is complex, costly and cannot be expected to occur every few years. Cooperation between academic investigators, small and medium enterprises with high innovative potential, and large industries promotes progress and should be facilitated, e.g. by public research funding.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87412,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nestle Nutrition workshop series. Paediatric programme\",\"volume\":\"66 \",\"pages\":\"1-17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000318944\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nestle Nutrition workshop series. Paediatric programme\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000318944\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2010/7/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nestle Nutrition workshop series. Paediatric programme","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000318944","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2010/7/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

创新对生命科学和经济至关重要,但创新对公共卫生的价值取决于其对促进健康的影响。母乳喂养并不是一种创新,而是在2.5亿至3亿年的时间里缓慢进化而来的,但它的总效益并没有被更具创新性的婴儿喂养方式所超越。直到19世纪,母乳替代品喂养不足的婴儿死亡率很高。1865年,冯·李比希(von Liebig)的“婴儿汤”取得了重大进步,这是第一个基于化学母乳分析的母乳替代品,很快就被商业化应用。其他早期的创新包括以乳清蛋白为主的配方,添加特定的碳水化合物来促进双歧杆菌(“益生元”)和活细菌(“益生菌”),这些显然是最近创新的前身。由于配方奶粉喂养的婴儿的许多结果与母乳喂养的婴儿的结果不同,因此存在创新的机会。令人担忧的是,创新带来的预期经济效益可能会压倒科学论证。商业和市场需求必须通过独立的儿科和科学评估来平衡。开发具有相关结果效应的创新是复杂的、昂贵的,不能指望每隔几年就发生一次。学术研究人员、具有创新潜力的中小型企业和大型工业之间的合作可以促进进步,并应通过公共研究资助等方式加以促进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Innovations in infant milk feeding: from the past to the future.

Innovation is important for life science and economy, but the value of innovation for public health depends on its impact on promoting health. Breastfeeding is not innovative but evolved slowly over 250-300 million years, yet its total benefits are not surpassed by more innovative ways of infant feeding. Until the 19th century, infants fed inadequate breast milk substitutes suffered from high mortality. In 1865 a major improvement was von Liebig's 'soup for infants', the first breast milk substitute based on chemical human milk analysis, soon followed by commercial applications. Other early innovations include whey protein-dominant formula, addition of specific carbohydrates to promote bifidobacteria ('prebiotic') and of live bacteria ('probiotic'), predecessors of apparently recent innovations. Opportunities for innovations exist since many outcomes in formula-fed infants do not match those in breastfed populations. Of concern, expected economic benefits through innovations may override scientific arguments. Business and marketing desires must be counterbalanced by independent pediatric and scientific evaluation. Developing innovations with relevant outcome effects is complex, costly and cannot be expected to occur every few years. Cooperation between academic investigators, small and medium enterprises with high innovative potential, and large industries promotes progress and should be facilitated, e.g. by public research funding.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信