Early Sugar Restriction Linked to Lower Cancer Risk and Slower Aging in New Study

A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found “causal evidence” linking sugar consumption during the first thousand days of life to a higher cancer risk. The researchers analyzed a rare historical event when there was an abrupt end to sugar rationing in Britain in September 1953. They evaluated data from more than 64,000 UK Biobank participants between 1951 and 1956. Those who spent more of their first 1,000 days under sugar rationing had lower rates of certain cancers and showed signs of slower cellular aging.

During sugar rationing, the average adult intake was 40 grams per day, but it nearly doubled to about 80 grams per day within a year. The current recommendations for adult sugar consumption by the World Health Organization (WHO) are 50 grams for somebody consuming 2,000 calories per day. Children under two received no official sugar or sweets allocation during the sugar rationing period, but the culture changed when the rationing abruptly stopped in September 1953.

The researchers evaluated the data and treated this event as a natural experiment. They grouped people by how much of their first 1,000 days fell within the rationing period and tracked their health outcomes reported within the UK Biobank decades later. Models adjusted for factors, including age, sex, birth location, genetic ancestry markers, and neighborhood deprivation. Those who experienced a longer period of sugar rationing had a 69% lower risk for liver and related bile duct cancers, 52% lower for prostate, 41% lower for lung, 40% lower for rectal, and 36% lower for breast cancer.

The researchers also evaluated biological markers of aging. Those who experienced a longer rationing period during their first 1,000 days had longer leukocyte telomeres, which are the protective caps on chromosomes that shorten as cells age. The length was equivalent to about 2.2 fewer years of biological aging by the time the participants were evaluated in their 50s.

The researchers posed two potential reasons to explain the association. One is that early nutritional conditions might program metabolism and immune development. The second is that food choices during development may shape lifelong taste preferences.

There are limitations to the study methodology because it is not a randomized trial and specific sugar intake was not measured. Rather, it is assumed that sugar intake increased when sugar rationing halted, and the potential amount of that increase cannot be measured. Other postwar conditions related to healthcare, pollution, and smoking patterns may also play a role.

Other research conducted on this historical time period also found that those who were exposed to more sugar rationing during their early years of life had lower risks of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, heart disease, and stroke.

The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Heart Association recommend no added sugars for children under age two. The latest edition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans published in 2026 recommends no added sugars for children under 11 years of age and adolescents, and adults should not exceed 10 grams of added sugar per meal.

National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data from 2011-2016 found about 61% of infants aged 6-11 months consume some added sugar on a given day, averaging about four grams. Nearly all toddlers aged 12-23 months consumed added sugar daily with an average of 23-24 grams per day. More recent data show over half of children aged 1-5 consumed at least one sugar-sweetened beverage in the prior week.

The British sugar rationing study examined a rare point in history before the postwar growth of processed foods and sweetened beverages. During the rationing period, infants and toddlers were expected to receive very little or no added sugar in their diets. The typical U.S. toddler is consuming significantly more sugar as processed foods are more likely to contain added sugars.

Solid Starts, a website that provides recommendations to parents on how to introduce foods to their babies, says sugar is safe to be added to a baby’s diet as soon as they are able to eat solids at about six months of age. They say it can be beneficial to wait and warn against eating excessive amounts of sugar. The page on sugar also states, “restrictions and strict rules around food can have unintended consequences, including preoccupation and a strained relationship with sweet food for the whole family, including baby.” They add that “nutrition perfectionism is not realistic.” The sources provided regarding strict rules don’t generally apply to babies who have not been previously exposed to foods with added sugar.

Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages is linked with obesity, and added sugar consumption is associated with weight gain and risk of incident obesity. According to CDC statistics from August 2021 to August 2023, 14.9% of children aged 2-5 years old have obesity, 22.1% of children aged 6-11, and 22.9% of those aged 12-19. Among all children aged 2-19, 36.2% are overweight or obese. 72.4% of adults 20 and older are overweight or obese.

The United States is the leading consumer of sugar across the world and also has the highest rate of obesity among high-income countries at 42%. The United Kingdom has an obesity rate of 27.8%, and Canada has a rate of 29.5%.

Weilong Zhang, a co-author of the British sugar rationing study, wrote an article about the study for The Conversation. “What this historical evidence shows is that, during a critical period of development, even relatively small differences in sugar exposure over a short period may leave effects that are still observable half a century later,” Zhang wrote. “Children may not remember what they ate before age two. But their later health, their bodies and even their taste preferences may still carry the imprint of those very early-life experiences.”