Nutrition facts of infant formulas sold in São Paulo state: assessment of fat and fatty acid contents

ObjectiveThis study determined the contents of fats, saturated fatty acids, trans fatty acids, linoleic acid, alpha-linolenic acid, arachidonic acid and docosahexaenoic acid in infant formulas and compared them with the nutrition facts reported on the respective packaging.MethodsFourteen samples of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: KUS, Mahyara Markievicz Mancio, SILVA, Simone Alves da, AUED-PIMENTEL, Sabria, MANCINI-FILHO, Jorge
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2023
País:Brasil
Institución:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas (PUC-CAMPINAS)
Repositorio:Revista de Nutrição
Idioma:portugués
OAI Identifier:oai:ojs.periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br:article/9348
Acceso en línea:https://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/nutricao/article/view/9348
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Fatty acids
Infant formula
Nutritional facts
Lipids
Infant nutrition
Ácidos graxos
Fórmulas infantis
Informação nutricional
Lipídeos
Nutrição do lactente
Descripción
Sumario:ObjectiveThis study determined the contents of fats, saturated fatty acids, trans fatty acids, linoleic acid, alpha-linolenic acid, arachidonic acid and docosahexaenoic acid in infant formulas and compared them with the nutrition facts reported on the respective packaging.MethodsFourteen samples of six different infant formula brands sold in the state of São Paulo were analyzed. The extraction and quantification of fats were done by the official method (Roese Gottlieb) and the quantification of fatty acids by gas chromatography using an internal standard. All analyses were repeated three times.ResultsThe results showed that the nutrition facts printed on the packaging regarding total fats were correct for all samples, one was incorrect for saturated fatty acids, six were incorrect for trans fatty acids, four were incorrect for linoleic acid, ten were incorrect for alpha-linolenic acid, two were incorrect for arachidonic acid and three were incorrect for docosahexaenoic acid. The formulas that presented the greatest differences between nutrition facts and actual contents were those for infants aged zero to six months.ConclusionThe results indicate that sanitary surveillance programs need to constantly monitor these products since the incorrect amount of nutrients may significantly affect the child’s development.