Breastfeeding in the First Days of Life Is Associated With Lower Blood Pressure at 3 Years of Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Breastfeeding in infancy is associated with lower cardiovascular disease risk in adulthood; however, the amount of breastfeeding required to achieve this benefit is unknown. Methods and Results In the CHILD (Canadian Healthy Infant Longitudinal Development) Cohort Study, we analyzed 2382 children with complete data on early life feeding and blood pressure. Infant feeding was documented from hospital records in the first few days of life and reported by mothers throughout infancy. Blood pressure was measured at 3 years of age. Analyses controlled for birth weight, gestational age, socioeconomic status, maternal body mass index, and other potential confounders. We found that nearly all children (2333/2382; 97.9%) were ever breastfed, of whom 98 (4.2%) only briefly received breast milk during their birth hospitalization ("early limited breastfeeding"). At 3 years of age, blood pressure was higher in children who were never breastfed (mean systolic/diastolic 103/60 mm Hg) compared with those who were ever breastfed (99/58 mm Hg), including those who received only early limited breastfeeding (99/57 mm Hg). These differences in systolic blood pressure persisted in adjusted models (ever breastfed: -3.47 mm Hg, 95% CI, -6.14 to -0.80; early limited breastfeeding: -4.24 mm Hg, 95% CI, -7.45 to -1.04). Among breastfed children, there was no significant dose-response association according to the duration or exclusivity of breastfeeding. Associations were not mediated by child body mass index. Conclusions Although the benefits of sustained and exclusive breastfeeding are indisputable, this study indicates any breastfeeding, regardless of duration or exclusivity, is associated with lower blood pressure at 3 years of age. Further research examining the bioactive components of early breast milk, underlying mechanisms, and long-term associations is warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".