【经济学人】也许并没有一些营销人员说得那么有用
Is fortified infant formula worth it?
强化婴儿配方奶粉值得买吗？
Perhaps less than some marketers claim
BABY MILK has come a long way since a patented “soup for infants” made with cow’s milk, potassium bicarbonate, and wheat and malt flour was introduced in Prussia in 1865. Today the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, an American regulator, requires baby formulas to have minimum levels of 30 nutrients including iron, iodine and vitamin D.
自 1865 年普鲁士推出一种获得专利的“婴儿汤”以来，婴儿奶制品已经发展了很远。当时这种产品由牛奶、碳酸氢钾、小麦粉和麦芽粉制成。如今，美国监管机构 Food and Drug Administration，也就是 FDA，要求婴儿配方奶必须含有 30 种营养素的最低水平，包括铁、碘和维生素 D。
Formula-makers these days are just as keen to tell people about the extras they add to their products, too. In 2023 the BMJ, a journal, published a study of 757 formula products in 15 rich and poor countries. Many trumpeted additives such as prebiotics, probiotics and long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, LCPUFAs; some of which must be included in formula sold in Britain and the EU. The benefits claimed included supporting “growth and development” and “a healthy immune system”. The most common claim, appearing on just over half the formulas that claimed benefits, was that they helped develop the brain, eyes or nervous system.
如今，配方奶生产商也同样热衷于告诉人们，他们在产品中额外添加了什么。2023 年，医学期刊 BMJ 发表了一项研究，分析了 15 个富裕和贫穷国家的 757 款配方奶产品。许多产品大力宣传益生元、益生菌和长链多不饱和脂肪酸，也就是 LCPUFAs 等添加成分；其中一些成分在英国和欧盟销售的配方奶中是必须添加的。厂家宣称的好处包括支持“生长和发育”以及“健康免疫系统”。最常见的说法是帮助大脑、眼睛或神经系统发育，这出现在略多于一半声称有健康益处的配方奶产品中。
Do they? Infant formulas are usually classified as food rather than medicines, which leaves them freer to make claims about benefits without the backing of rigorous trials. Three-quarters of the products evaluated did not cite scientific references. Of the references that were cited, only half were clinical trials. Of those trials, fewer than a third were registered. Among the small group of registered trials that used a randomised comparison, nine in ten claims relied on evidence the study’s authors deemed to have a high risk of bias. Industry funding and affiliations were common.
它们真的有这些效果吗？婴儿配方奶通常被归类为食品，而不是药品，这让厂家在没有严格试验支持的情况下，更容易宣称产品有各种好处。在被评估的产品中，四分之三没有引用科学文献。即使引用了文献，其中也只有一半是临床试验。在这些临床试验中，注册过的还不到三分之一。在少数使用随机比较的注册试验中，十分之九的宣传说法所依赖的证据，被研究作者认为存在较高偏倚风险。行业资助和利益关联也很常见。
The risk of bias might give some parents pause for thought. But it does not, in itself, prove that their claims are wrong. Only the evidence can do that, and as best as scientists can tell, it is equivocal. A review of 15 randomised trials involving 1,889 infants, last updated in 2017, found that those given formulas supplemented with LCPUFAs had no better brain development or visual acuity than those fed less-fortified formulations. A study published in 2021 examined 1,607 British adolescents and found that those who had been fed supplemented formula as babies had not gained an academic edge.
偏倚风险可能会让一些父母停下来想一想。但偏倚风险本身并不能证明这些宣传是错的。只有证据才能证明这一点，而根据科学家目前最好的判断，证据并不明确。一项纳入 15 个随机试验、涉及 1889 名婴儿的综述，最近一次更新于 2017 年。它发现，食用添加 LCPUFAs 配方奶的婴儿，在大脑发育或视力敏锐度方面，并不比食用较少强化配方奶的婴儿更好。2021 年发表的一项研究分析了 1607 名英国青少年，发现那些婴儿时期喝过强化配方奶的人，并没有获得学业优势。
On the other hand, a meta-analysis of nine randomised controlled trials involving 1,039 babies was published in the journal Nutrients in 2025. It found a slight, but statistically significant, improvement in cognitive development among infants fed formulas supplemented with two LCPUFAs, ARA and DHA. The FDA notes that other studies have suggested that babies born prematurely may especially benefit.
另一方面，2025 年，期刊 Nutrients 发表了一项荟萃分析，纳入 9 个随机对照试验，共涉及 1039 名婴儿。该研究发现，食用添加两种 LCPUFAs，即 ARA 和 DHA 配方奶的婴儿，在认知发育方面有轻微但具有统计学意义的改善。FDA 也指出，其他研究提示，早产儿可能尤其受益。
Artificial formulas have generally proved safe in trials. Experts worry, though, that breast-feeding is undermined by slick, emotive marketing of formulas with an aura of scientific superiority.
人工配方奶在试验中总体被证明是安全的。不过，专家担心，那些精致、煽情，并带有科学优越感光环的配方奶营销，会削弱母乳喂养。
The benefits of breast-feeding vis-à-vis any type of formula are well established. Many studies link breast-feeding with lower rates of infection for infants; several recent ones have linked it to lower rates of asthma and allergies. It is also much cheaper than buying formula milk, even accounting for the extra calories that a breast-feeding mother must consume. The FDA, and many other rich-country health bodies, advise that breast-feeding is optimal. But mothers who cannot breast-feed, or who find that they must top up with formula, should not worry. Today’s infant formulas are safe and nutritious, even if some of the marketing runs ahead of the science.
母乳喂养相对于任何类型配方奶的好处，已经得到充分确认。许多研究把母乳喂养与婴儿感染率较低联系起来；近期几项研究还把母乳喂养与哮喘和过敏发生率较低联系起来。即使考虑到哺乳母亲需要摄入额外热量，母乳喂养也比购买配方奶便宜得多。FDA 和许多富裕国家的卫生机构都建议，母乳喂养是最佳选择。但不能母乳喂养，或发现自己必须用配方奶补充的母亲，也不必担心。如今的婴儿配方奶安全且营养充足，尽管某些营销宣传走在了科学证据前面。
fortified /ˈfɔːtɪfaɪd/ 强化的；添加营养素的。having extra nutrients added to improve nutritional value.
prebiotics /ˌpriːbaɪˈɒtɪks/ 益生元。substances that help beneficial bacteria grow in the gut.
probiotics /ˌprəʊbaɪˈɒtɪks/ 益生菌。live microorganisms that may benefit digestive or immune health.
equivocal /ɪˈkwɪvəkəl/ 不明确的；证据模棱两可的。uncertain and open to more than one interpretation.
visual acuity /ˈvɪʒuəl əˈkjuːəti/ 视力敏锐度。the sharpness or clarity of vision.
经济学商业人评论复制ID☞：JJXREN
【经济学商业人评论】翻译爱好者非官方组织,每天几分钟,学习财经英语,为考研英语雅思阅读提供复习材料,免费的双语杂志和经典剪报内容，在知识上和精神上给您学习生活双重享受，内容仅限个人学术研究或者个人翻译作品欣赏用途,请勿转载用于商业。
