Wednesday, September 2, 2026 | Edition 193 | Item #1

That’s the message from a fascinating new study from Cambridge University. The researchers wanted to understand the impact that sugar consumption at early ages has on lifelong health. It’s an almost impossible topic to study because of the challenge of identifying and recruiting a large enough population under the age of two, giving them different diets, and then following their health into old age.

Almost impossible but not impossible, because the researchers were able to identify and take advantage of a natural experiment. After World War II, sugar was rationed in Britain until September 1953, when restrictions were relaxed and sugar consumption skyrocketed. The lifting of rationing meant that children born just a few months apart had very different levels of sugar exposure both in the womb and during early childhood.

The Cambridge team found that people who experienced longer periods of sugar rationing during their first 1,000 days (starting at gestation) had a lower incidence of five types of cancer: breast, prostate, liver, rectal and lung cancer. The effect was strongest for liver cancer, where rates were around 69% lower, and weakest – though still significant –  for breast cancer, at 36% lower. Importantly, these differences only began to appear decades after sugar rationing had ended. And it wasn’t just cancers: the people who experienced longer periods of sugar rationing also had longer telomeres, equivalent to about 2.2 years of slower biological aging.

Regulating the consumption of sugar at an early age also had a lasting impact on dietary choices. People who had lower consumption of sugar in the first 1,000 days still consumed less sugar 50 years later.

We’re not making the case to return to wartime rationing, but this is further proof that  longevity begins at birth – and that early decisions and early environments can shape the entire life course.