Building Blocks for Baby Food

Every new parent faces awesome, unfamiliar responsibilities with the birth of a child. Not the least of these is the proper feeding of Baby. Breast or bottle? When to start solids? Organic or conventional? It’s no wonder moms and dads can find themselves at a loss for what to do.

Roughly 4 million children are born in the United States each year, according to the National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD, and it’s safe to assume that quite a few of these children’s parents look to baby-food manufacturers to set Junior off on the right foot.

For baby-food product developers, the stakes couldn’t be higher. “It’s a very sensitive and emotional issue,” says Ram Chaudhari, Ph.D., senior vice president, R&D, Fortitech Inc., Schenectady, NY. “There is no room for an error whatsoever.”

Shooting for second best

Of course, the most natural and nutritious food for infants is Mom’s own milk. No one—not even infant-formula manufacturers—disputes that. The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, American Dietetic Association, and World Health Organization all advocate breast-feeding as the best choice. Why? “The list is incredibly long,” says Judy Hopkinson, Ph.D., associate professor of pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston.

Breast-fed babies suffer fewer respiratory and ear infections, less diarrhea and constipation, and fewer cases of meningitis than their formula-fed counterparts. Studies show that breast-feeding improves premature infants’ development, and can protect against allergies, asthma, diabetes, sudden infant death syndrome and obesity. Breast-feeding may even make babies smarter: Researchers found that six months of exclusive breast-feeding correlates to IQs 5 to 10 points higher than in formula-fed babies.

With the odds stacked this high, it’s a wonder anyone would choose not to breast-feed. But it’s not always a choice. HIV or AIDS, side effects of chemotherapy, surgery, and certain medications may make breast-feeding impossible or unwise to pursue. And, adds Anne Davis, executive director of scientific affairs, Martek Biosciences Corporation, Columbia, MD, “If babies are born with inborn errors of metabolism, they can’t take breast milk.” And, she says, “because of economics or politics, sometimes it’s just not feasible for women to breast-feed exclusively for the ideal amount of time.”

It’s for moms and babies like these that dairy- or soy-based infant formula is a modern miracle—albeit an imperfect one. “You can’t design a living cell to put in a formula that’s going to respond to the child’s environment and incorporate what’s going on with the mother and do for the child what human milk—which is a living substance—is going to do,” Hopkinson says. Some of the beneficial components, such as pathogen-specific immunoglobulin A (IgA), are just too difficult or costly to add to formula. But, once we accept we can no more replicate mother’s milk than we could her fingerprint, we can get down to providing moms and infants the second-best alternative to the breast.

FDA keeps a close eye on us as we do. “These are highly regulated products,” Chaudhari notes. Because infant formula often serves as Baby’s sole source of nutrition during key developmental stages, the agency imposes strict statutory and regulatory requirements, as detailed in section 412 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), and Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Sections 106 and 107. FDA also mandates minimum levels for 29 nutrients, 9 of which also have maximums.

“B-complex vitamins, calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, iron, zinc, manganese, copper, iodine, sodium, even choline and inositol, and the fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E and K: They’re all indicated,” notes Chaudhari. (See section 412(i) of the FFDCA and 21 CFR 107.100 for further specifics on nutrient levels.) 

Among these nutrients, “iron is one of the most-critical for young babies, because human milk is a poor source of iron,” notes Guy H. Johnson, Ph.D., principal, Johnson Nutrition Solutions LLC, Kalamazoo, MI. It’s critical, he says, because “when you’re in your first year, we used to say you doubled your birth weight at 6 months and tripled it by a year. So, on a percentage basis, you’re growing like a weed at that age. And you have to expand blood volume, and that takes iron.” At birth, a full-term infant has enough iron stored to supply their 6-mg-perday need for the first 4 to 6 months.

After that, however, the need rises to 7 to 10 mg per day, and a supplemental source—often iron-fortified formula, which some say should offer as much as 12 mg of iron per liter—has to pick up the slack.

Calcium is another target in infant formula, because of its role in healthy bone deposition. But, just as important as calcium itself is the calcium-to-phosphorus ratio. “The calcium- phosphorus ratio is very important because, if you have more phosphorus than calcium, then it interferes with the absorption of calcium,” Chaudhari explains. Taking “mother’s milk as the benchmark,” he says, as well as results from infant nutrition studies, “you’ve got to have, say, a minimum of 1.2 parts of calcium to 1 part of phosphorus.”

In addition to vitamins and minerals, today’s formulas contain careful blends of proteins and fats—with particular attention focused these days on two long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LC-PUFAs)—docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (ARA)—due to their importance to an infant’s rapidly developing brain, nerves and retina. Other baby-formula improvements might include probiotic cultures to assist with immunity, and prebiotics to ensure they remain viable in Baby’s digestive tract.

First-food fortification

“Once they start taking solid food, it’s a whole new ballgame,” Davis says. “Once a baby gets closer to a year, they can convert the linoleic acid they consume pretty readily to arachidonic acid.” Conversion of ALA to DHA, on the other hand, remains less than 1%. So, a baby making that delicate transition from formula to solid foods may still benefit from a continuing supply of ready-formed DHA.

Beech-Nut, Latham, NY, adds Martek’s algal-source DHA to its DHA plus+ line of baby foods, including rice and multigrain cereals, sweet potatoes, macaroni and cheese, and a pasta vegetable medley. “And, because these are baby foods that are for babies younger than 1 year,” notes Angela Tsetsis, vice president of corporate development, Martek, “they’re continuing that nutrition, and adding to it. They’re augmenting the infant formula”—which is precisely what a baby’s first foods should do.

The American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Nutrition advises that, by the time Baby reaches 4 to 6 months, or can sit up, can handle at least 32 oz. of formula per day, or has at least doubled their birth weight, they’re ready for solid foods.

Babies “are still not completely mature,” notes Chaudhari. “Their digestive system is still maturing. Their growth is very rapid—physical growth as well as cognitive health—and food has to be designed accordingly to meet those nutritional needs. So, in moderation, fortification is always a good policy and practice; to add nutrients in moderate amounts so, at the end of the day, you have at least 60% to 80% of the required nutrient load in your baby food.”

Among the potentially limiting nutrients at this stage is iron, with the need rising to 15 mg per day for a toddler, notes Kim Bremer, category group manager, Earth’s Best, part of the Hain Celestial Group, Inc., Boulder, CO. And, while a baby can theoretically harvest iron from foods rich in it, “many toddlers will not choose foods that are high in iron, such as meats, spinach and broccoli,” she points out. Thus, iron-fortified foods like rice cereal—popular for its easy digestibility and low allergenicity—are very common first foods that babies can stick with until they’re as old as 18 to 24 months.

Chaudhari cautions, however, that a diet too heavy in cereals could hamper iron absorption because of inhibitory compounds like fibers, phytates and polyphenolic tannins. Furthermore, bioavailability is an issue, as in the case of the ferrous sulfate used in infant formula. “You cannot use ferrous sulfate in cereal because of discoloration and organoleptic issues, such as a metallic aftertaste,” he says. In that case, he suggests either a microencapsulated ferrous sulfate, or electrolytic, also known as elemental, iron with a fine-mesh particle size for maximum absorption. Noting that elemental iron is “slightly less bioavailable” than other forms, he points out that “when you have a mixed food containing an organic acid like vitamin C, that will make it more bio-available.”

Calcium need in toddlers rises to about 500 mg per day—easily attainable with 2 cups of milk, per the USDA’s Food Guide Pyramid. However, for younger children, experts recommend delaying the introduction of cow’s milk until their first birthday as it’s low in iron and could displace iron-rich foods.

“When you start adding other fluid in the diet,” says Hopkinson, “parents sometimes want to go with skim milk or 2% milk early on. And they really shouldn’t be doing that at all. It should be whole milk up until at least 2 years of age—probably 3 or 4. Then, by 5 years, or possibly even earlier, you want to start thinking about cutting down to 2%.”

It just doesn’t add up

Parents are often concerned about the ambiguous class of “additives” that can include anything from salt and sugar to modified starch. “The consumer, starting in the late ’60s, early ’70s, really expressed a more-decided preference for absolutely nothing added to baby food,” says Johnson. “So, most all companies now adhere to a no-added-salt, no-added- sugar, no-added-colors, no-added-preservatives policy.” And, admittedly, it might not be a bad idea. Take sodium, for example. Babies get all they need from food and formula, so there’s no real reason to add it to products.

As for sugar, we’re hardwired to like it, even at a very early age, and a little added to an otherwise nutritious food can mean the difference between the food being accepted or rejected. But, as a source of “empty” calories, it displaces other more-nutritious foods. Formulators looking for sucrose alternatives might consider fruit juices or purées, or even applesauce, which look nicer on a label, but, depending on the form, might not be overly nutritious.

Functional starches and flours have taken a hit in the public imagination as “adulterants” or “fillers” in baby foods. Yet, they’re perfectly safe and wholesome, and by improving a baby food’s texture, make it that much more palatable and likely to end up in the baby and not on the bib. Modified tapioca and corn starches are good choices for fruit and acidic preparations whose pH would render a native starch or flour nonfunctional. But, if parental objections to modification run high, functional native starches can serve as replacements, as can even label-friendlier blends of fruit-based thickening purées.

Better safe than sorry

While we may sigh resignedly at parents’ alarm over innocent ingredients like modified starch, perhaps we owe those parents some slack. After all, even modest threats can assume outsized proportions when the health and safety of one’s baby is on the line. “Pound for pound, babies consume two to four times more fruits and vegetables than adults and are exposed to a higher proportion of potential contaminants,” Bremer says. “If potentially toxic chemicals or metals are ingested, they can begin to accumulate in the various organ systems and tissues and, in turn, could compromise the immune-system development.” And it may well be the unease inherent to this scenario that has boosted sales of organic baby foods by 57% between 2001 and 2005, according to ACNielsen, New York.

The jury is still out on whether the rise is warranted, especially given organic’s high price vis-à-vis conventional. Furthermore, Hopkinson says, “baby food manufacturers are very good about making sure that the initial product they use is free of pesticides. They really do that very carefully, and I think that’s a wonderful thing to know because, while parents might buy organic foods, the quality control is a little less rigorous than what a manufacturer might be able to arrange.”

Perhaps more important than organic vs. conventional is the imperative for unassailable microbial safety in baby-food manufacturing. Foodborne disease is the top food hazard in the United States, and that risk is magnified in a baby.

Bacterial contamination can come from any number of sources: field contamination, contaminated water, or poor processing and handling procedures—in the plant or at home. For these reasons, any product intended for Baby should be sterilized, as all shelfstable retorted, bottled or aseptically processed baby foods are. “And that’s something that a lot of parents couldn’t believe,” Johnson says. “The reason that there are no preservatives added to jarred baby foods is that you don’t need any. They’re cooked so that they’re commercially sterile and there’s no need for any other kind of preservation system.”

Regardless, manufacturers should be on top of all the flashpoints: maintaining strict GMPs and a thorough HACCP plan; consistent monitoring of sterilization and packaging equipment; and clear product labeling with proper storage and preparation guidelines.

As well they should. Baby deserves nothing less.

Kimberly J. Decker, a California-based technical writer, has a B.S. in Consumer Food Science with a minor in English from the University of California, Davis. She lives in the San Francisco Bay area, where she enjoys eating and writing about food. You can reach her at kim@decker.net.