Research over the years has suggested intermittent fasting has the potential to improve our health and reduce the likelihood of developing cancer.

So what should we make of a new study in mice suggesting fasting increases the risk of cancer?

What is intermittent fasting?

Intermittent fasting means switching between times of eating and not eating. Unlike traditional diets that focus on what to eat, this approach focuses on when to eat.

There are lots of commonly used intermittent fasting schedules. The 16/8 plan means you only eat within an eight-hour window, then fast for the remaining 16 hours. Another popular option is the 5:2 diet, where you eat normally for five days then restrict calories for two days.

In Australia, poor diet contributes to 7% of all cases of disease, including coronary heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, and cancers of the bowel and lung. Globally, poor diet is linked to 22% of deaths in adults over the age of 25.

Intermittent fasting has gained a lot of attention in recent years for its potential health benefits. Fasting influences metabolism, which is how your body processes food and energy. It can affect how the body absorbs nutrients from food and burns energy from sugar and fat.

What did the new study find?

The new study, published in Nature, found when mice ate again after fasting, their gut stem cells, which help repair the intestine, became more active. The stem cells were better at regenerating compared with those of mice who were either totally fasting or eating normally.

This suggests the body might be better at healing itself when eating after fasting.

However, this could also have a downside. If there are genetic mutations present, the burst of stem cell-driven regeneration after eating again might make it easier for cancer to develop.

Polyamines – small molecules important for cell growth – drive this regeneration after refeeding. These polyamines can be produced by the body, influenced by diet, or come from gut bacteria.

The findings suggest that while fasting and refeeding can improve stem cell function and regeneration, there might be a tradeoff with an increased risk of cancer, especially if fasting and refeeding cycles are repeated over time.

While this has been shown in mice, the link between intermittent fasting and cancer risk in humans is more complicated and not yet fully understood.

What has other research found?

Studies in animals have found intermittent fasting can help with weight loss, improve blood pressure and blood sugar levels, and subsequently reduce the risks of diabetes and heart disease.

Research in humans suggests intermittent fasting can reduce body weight, improve metabolic health, reduce inflammation, and enhance cellular repair processes, which remove damaged cells that could potentially turn cancerous.

However, other studies warn that the benefits of intermittent fasting are the same as what can be achieved through calorie restriction, and that there isn’t enough evidence to confirm it reduces cancer risk in humans.

What about in people with cancer?

In studies of people who have cancer, fasting has been reported to protect against the side effects of chemotherapy and improve the effectiveness of cancer treatments, while decreasing damage to healthy cells.

Prolonged fasting in some patients who have cancer has been shown to be safe and may potentially be able to decrease tumour growth.

On the other hand, some experts advise caution. Studies in mice show intermittent fasting could weaken the immune system and make the body less able to fight infection, potentially leading to worse health outcomes in people who are unwell. However, there is currently no evidence that fasting increases the risk of bacterial infections in humans.

So is it OK to try intermittent fasting?

The current view on intermittent fasting is that it can be beneficial, but experts agree more research is needed. Short-term benefits such as weight loss and better overall health are well supported. But we don’t fully understand the long-term effects, especially when it comes to cancer risk and other immune-related issues.

Since there are many different methods of intermittent fasting and people react to them differently, it’s hard to give advice that works for everyone. And because most people who participated in the studies were overweight, or had diabetes or other health problems, we don’t know how the results apply to the broader population.

For healthy people, intermittent fasting is generally considered safe. But it’s not suitable for everyone, particularly those with certain medical conditions, pregnant or breastfeeding women, and people with a history of eating disorders. So consult your health-care provider before starting any fasting program.

Amali Cooray, PhD Candidate in Genetic Engineering and Cancer, WEHI (Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research)

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

When you have a baby, mealtimes can be messy and stressful.

If you’re a new parent you may be unsure what, when, and how to feed your little one. And you may also worry about choking, particularly when it’s time to start feeding your baby solid foods.

For babies starting solids at the recommended age of six months, it’s important to offer foods in a variety of different ways. Purees can be a helpful starting point, but they shouldn’t be the only texture a baby experiences.

Research suggests not waiting too long to introduce lumpy or textured foods. Infants who start eating lumps at 10 months or later were more likely to develop feeding difficulties and become selective eaters.

So if you’re a parent, where do you start? And what other foods are good to try?

Why texture matters

Mealtimes are crucial for a child’s development because they’re an opportunity to explore different textures and develop oral motor skills.

Imagine you’re eating a piece of toast. This involves performing a range of movements including holding, biting, chewing and swallowing. All of these actions require different muscles to work together, and only improve through practice. But that practice is only effective if it involves real food, as opposed to non-edible teething toys and isolated oral exercises like jaw opening and closing or cheek puffing.

When starting solid foods, many parents rely on purees and pouches as convenient ways to feed their babies. There’s nothing wrong with puree in itself. Many of our favourite foods resemble purees. Think of buttery mashed potato, yogurt, ricotta and applesauce.

The problem arises when purees and pouches become the only texture parents offer their babies, particularly early on. Babies who only eat pureed foods have less opportunity to develop the skills needed for eating and drinking. And research suggests children who frequently eat pouched foods are more likely to become fussy eaters.

So there’s nothing inherently bad about pureed foods. But feeding your baby varied foods gives them more opportunity to develop crucial oral motor skills.

Does it matter how I feed my baby?

There are various ways to start giving your baby solid foods.

One common approach is “baby-led weaning”. That’s where parents encourage their baby to feed themselves, rather than fully spoon-feeding them. This can encourage your baby to be more independent and explore food on their own. But it may also make mealtimes messier and more time-consuming for parents. And it can also feel daunting for parents who are concerned about choking.

However, one 2016 study found babies who feed themselves are no more likely to choke than babies who are spoon-fed. Foods which are suitable for baby-led weaning include strips of omelette, ripe avocado wedges or well-cooked corn on the cob. However, the researchers emphasised the importance of preparing foods appropriately and using risk minimisation strategies. These include avoiding high-risk foods such as popcorn, cutting round foods such as grapes and cherry tomatoes, and supervising babies whenever they eat.

An ‘in-between’ option for feeding is to offer your baby purees, while giving them a degree of independence. For example, you may pre-load a spoon for your baby to bring to their own mouth. You can also pair purees with larger foods, say a broccoli floret dipped in hummus. These combinations will help your baby develop eating skills while you become more confident with feeding your baby.

No matter what feeding approach you take, infant first aid training is a must for parents and carers. And if your child was born premature, has a developmental delay or has specific nutrition requirements, it’s best to speak to a paediatrician before giving them solid foods.

When you have a picky eater

Even if your baby transitions well to solid foods, toddlerhood can bring a new set of challenges.

Toddlers tend to be selective about what foods they do or don’t eat. They may also become more cautious around unfamiliar foods. These are both normal parts of a child’s development.

But problems can arise when parents pressure toddlers to eat food they don’t want to eat or when they aren’t hungry. Even small gestures, such as using a “spoon as aeroplane” or asking them to take “one more bite” in front of the TV or tablet, can put pressure on children. As a result your child may eat that next mouthful but, over time, they may develop a negative relationship with food and mealtimes.

As parents and carers, our role is to offer food at predictable times and in positive mealtime environments. Some ways to do that include:

• trusting they’ll eat as much as they need
• eating shared meals when possible
• modelling enjoyment of different foods during shared meals
• offering new foods alongside familiar favourites
• giving children multiple opportunities to see and try new foods, even if they don’t eat them the first time.

Unfortunately, babies and toddlers won’t love every meal you make them. But in time they’ll come to learn about, and even enjoy, a world of different textures and tastes.

Lillian Krikheli, Lecturer in Speech Pathology, La Trobe University and Samantha Turner, Lecturer in Speech Pathology, La Trobe University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.