World War II Sugar Rationing Data Hints That Limiting Intake of the Sweet Stuff Early in Life Lowers the Risk of Dementia and Cancer
For roughly a decade leading up to September 1953, the United Kingdom limited sugar purchases. Scientists studied health outcomes in people born during the ration and right after
/https://tf-cmsv2-smithsonianmag-media.s3.amazonaws.com/filer_public/32/32/3232b726-b4f1-43c1-98c6-7cdefc6b9ff4/sugar.jpg)
Toddlers often whine to get their hands on sweet treats, while parents step in so the kids don’t gorge themselves on cake and candy. Doing so might have more benefits than avoiding a child who’s bouncing off the walls.
Limiting sugar intake during their earliest developmental windows might affect cognitive function and cancer risk up to 70 years later. According to two studies published in July the journals Neurology and npj Aging, people who lived during a national sugar ration during their first 1,000 days—starting at conception—experienced lower rates of Alzheimer’s disease, dementia, depression and anxiety as adults than those who consumed more of the sweetener.
“This is, to our knowledge, the first human evidence that limiting sugar exposure in very early life is associated with substantial long-term protection against both neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders,” Bing Zhang, a geriatric medicine researcher at Guangzhou First People’s Hospital in China and co-author of the npj Aging study, tells Medical News Today’s Corrie Pelc.
Additionally, a study published in August in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggests that the early life sugar rationing reduced the incidence of five major adult cancers.
Researchers had a rare historical event to thank for these insights: sugar rationing in the United Kingdom during World War II that ended in September 1953. For about a decade, government policy capped individual intake at roughly 40 grams a day—a stack of ten standard sugar cubes. Once rationing ended, national sugar consumption nearly doubled almost overnight.
Because children born just months apart experienced vastly different diets, the policy shift created a unique natural experiment with two sets of populations whose long-term outcomes could be studied. Scientists examined medical records of tens of thousands of individuals while minimizing differences in factors that could affect health outcomes, like socioeconomic status, that typically complicate nutrition research.
Zhang and his colleagues analyzed health records from more than 60,000 participants in the U.K. Biobank born between October 1951 and March 1956. Adults whose first 1,000 days fell under rationing had a 46 percent lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease and a 27 percent lower risk of all-cause dementia compared to those born after restrictions ended. Early sugar limits were also linked to an 11 percent reduction in depression risk and a 20 percent drop in anxiety risk.
Brain scans provided visual clues for these outcomes. Participants who consumed little sugar early in life had brains that appeared 0.39 years younger than their chronological age, along with larger volumes in memory-critical structures like the hippocampus and thalamus, the team found.
The findings were backed by the Neurology study conducted by a different team of researchers. They examined nearly 65,000 U.K. Biobank records and found that compared to those born after the sugar restriction, those with limited early intake had a 23 percent lower risk of dementia from any cause and 28 percent lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease. For those who lived with sugar rationing and did develop cognitive decline, symptoms appeared, on average, nearly 2.6 years later than those who didn’t experience the restriction.
Did you know? Other long-lasting health effects of sugar rationing
The same U.K. Biobank data also hint that sugar rationing in early life helped fend off diabetes and high blood pressure in adulthood, researchers reported in 2024.
What’s more, the health benefits of early sugar restriction appear to extend beyond neuroprotection. Using the same U.K. Biobank cohort, another research duo found that compared to non-sugar-rationing individuals, those who had little of the sweet stuff during their first 1,000 days had a lower incidence of breast, prostate, liver, rectal and lung cancers in adulthood. The effect was greatest for liver cancer, where rates were about 69 percent lower, and weakest for breast cancer, where they were roughly 36 percent lower.
“Our results suggest that early life may be especially important because both biological development and long-term food preferences are still being shaped,” study co-author Weilong Zhang, an economist at the University of Cambridge, tells Newsweek’s Daniella Gray.
He and his colleagues pinpointed two distinct mechanisms driving these long-term protections. On the cellular level, individuals born during rationing possessed longer telomeres—protective caps on chromosomes that shorten as cells age—than those who didn’t experience the ration. The length difference equals about 2.2 years of slower biological aging, the team calculates. Sugar-limited individuals also exhibited lower levels of granzyme B, a protein marker indicative of chronic immune stress.
The second mechanism is behavioral. Taste preferences established while in the womb and during infancy proved remarkably persistent. Around age 50, adults raised under sugar rationing tended to consume less sugar, eat smaller portions and maintain healthier, more diverse diets overall.
The findings don’t mean midlife interventions are futile. Dung Trinh, a physician with MemorialCare Medical Group and chief medical officer of the Healthy Brain Clinic in California, stresses that curbing adult sugar intake still improves cognitive health by mitigating obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease.
“The goal should not be to eliminate all sugar, especially from nutritious foods such as whole fruit, but to limit excessive added sugars as part of a broader lifestyle that includes exercise, healthy sleep, and good control of blood pressure, cholesterol and diabetes,” Trinh, who was not involved in the new research, tells Medical News Today.
All the study’s findings echo modern pediatric guidance. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans currently recommend avoiding added sugars entirely for children ages 10 and under.
“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, who worked on the cancer study, writes for the Conversation. People may not remember what they ate before their second birthday, but their bodies, brains and taste buds appear to carry the imprint for a lifetime.