ADHD Diet Archives - Health Tips From The Professor

Is Fluoride Safe For Pregnant Women?

July 23, 2024 by Dr. Steve Chaney

What Does This Study Mean For You?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Fluoridation of drinking water has always been controversial. On one side you have the dental and medical community who claim that fluoridation is a great public health advance. Their claim is that it strengthens teeth and prevents tooth decay with minimal risk to the public.

Although my dentist tells me that most of the “benefits” of fluoridation can be achieved with good dental hygiene. Fluoridation is just another example of the American public’s reliance on drugs and chemicals as a “quick fix” rather than taking the personal responsibility to make healthy lifestyle changes.

On the other side you have people who claim that fluoride is toxic at any level. Their claim is that there are many health issues with fluoridation that have been ignored by the dental and medical community. Their claims are that excess fluoride exposure increases the risk of:

Dental fluorosis (A discoloration of the teeth that is caused by overexposure to fluoride during childhood).

Bone fractures (Paradoxically, fluoride makes bones and teeth stronger, but it also makes them more fragile).

Arthritis.

Some types of cancer.

And in the middle are those who believe that fluoridation has both benefits and risks. They believe we should identify the risks, so we can advise people appropriately.

The study (AJ Main et al, JAMA Network Open, 2024; 7(5):e2411987) I will discuss today falls into this category. It also illustrates the difficulty in doing high-quality research on risks associated with fluoridation, which I will discuss.

How Was This Study Done?

The data for this study were obtained from the MADRES (Maternal and Developmental Risks from Environmental and Social Stressors) database. The women in this study were predominantly Hispanic women of low socioeconomic status who were recruited from prenatal clinics in Los Angeles serving predominantly medically underserved communities starting in 2015.

Maternal urinary fluoride (MUF) levels were measured during the third trimester of pregnancy between 2017 and 2020. The average MUF was 0.76 mg/dL, which is similar to the average MUF for women in this country. However, there was a broad range in MUF, so the women in this study were divided into quartiles based on their MUF score.

Their child’s score on the Preschool Behavior Checklist was measured at 36 months between 2020 and 2023. The Preschool Behavior Checklist is a 99-item questionnaire. The questionnaire measures 7 syndromes:

Emotionally reactive, anxious-depressed, somatic complaints (physical symptoms with no clear cause), withdrawal, sleep problems, attention problems, opposition-defiant problems, and aggressive behavior.

These symptoms are then used to calculate scores for two classes of problems:

Internalizing problems (anxiety, depression, somatic complaints, withdrawal, sleep problems).

Externalizing problems (attention problems, oppositional-defiant and aggressive behavior).

The questionnaire was also designed to provide scores for autism spectrum problems and ADHD problems.

Based on previous usage of the Preschool Behavior Checklist each of these scores can be divided into normal, borderline clinical problems, and clinical problems.

Is Fluoride Safe For Pregnant Women?

When comparing women in the highest Maternal Urinary Fluoride (MUF) quartile in the third trimester to women in the lowest quartile, their children at age 36 months:

Were 83% more likely to have a combination of internalizing and externalizing behavior problems in the borderline clinical and clinical range.

Were 84% more likely to have a combination of internalizing and externalizing behavior problems in the clinical range.

Were 18.5% more likely to have symptoms characteristic of autism spectrum disorder.

Were 11.3% more likely to have anxiety symptoms.

Were 19.6% more likely to have somatic complaints (symptoms with no clear cause).

The authors concluded, “These findings suggest that prenatal fluoride exposure may increase risk of neurobehavioral problems among children living in optimally fluoridated areas in the US. These findings suggest there may be a need to establish recommendations for limiting exposure to fluoride during the prenatal period, a time when the developing brain is known to be especially vulnerable to injury from environmental insults.”

What Are The Strengths And Weaknesses Of This Study?

This is the first study of its kind in the United States. As such it should be regarded as a “proof of principle” study that needs to be confirmed by larger follow-up studies. However, it is fully consistent with two larger studies published in Canada and Mexico.

As a “proof of principle study, it does have some limitations, namely:

It was performed with a Hispanic population of low socioeconomic status and limited access to healthcare. It needs to be repeated with other population groups to see if it is generalizable to the general population. This is important because, if there is a need to make a recommendation to minimize fluoride intake during pregnancy, we need to know whether that recommendation applies to all women or just to certain high-risk groups.

It is an association study which does not prove cause and effect. Ideally, it should be followed by placebo-controlled intervention studies to prove cause and effect.

It is a very small study. Ideally, it should be followed by much larger studies.

However, it is unlikely that either of those follow-up studies will be done. It would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to conduct large-scale studies – especially if they were placebo-controlled intervention studies. And with the dental and medical community fully convinced fluoridation has no risks, it would be very difficult to get that kind of money.

Even if that money were available, 73% of US communities have fluoridated water. Plus, most bottled beverages in the US are made with fluoridated water. So, it would not be easy to find a suitable control population for a placebo-controlled intervention study.

What Does This Study Mean For You?

As I shared above, this is a “proof of principle” study. It suggests, but does not prove, fluoride exposure during pregnancy may increase the risk of neurobehavioral issues with your offspring.

However, I also realize that if you are pregnant or thinking of becoming pregnant and you spend any time on the internet, you are bombarded with all the things you must avoid if you want to have a healthy baby. I don’t want to add to your anxiety.

So, let’s assume the conclusions of this article might be true. What can you do?

With respect to drinking water, the answer is simple:

Drink filtered water or bottled water.

- Most filtration systems remove fluoride (make sure yours does).

- Many bottled waters do not contain fluoride. Read the label to be sure:

- - If it is bottled tap water, it probably contains fluoride.

- - If it is spring water, the fluoride would have to be added and would appear on the label.

- - If it is filtered or distilled water, it does not contain fluoride.

Since municipal water supplies often contain low levels of other contaminants, this is a good idea even if you aren’t pregnant.

With respect to bottled beverages, the answer is more complex.

The list of beverages made with fluoridated municipal water is a long one. It includes sodas, energy drinks, teas, fruit juices “made from concentrate”, and much more.

However, you already know that most of these beverages are bad for you because they contain added sugar and/or a long list of artificial ingredients. Substituting filtered water or fluoride-free bottled water for them is a good idea whether you are pregnant or not.

The Bottom Line

A recent study looked at the correlation between fluoride intake during pregnancy and neurobehavioral issues in the children at 36 months.

When comparing pregnant women with the highest fluoride intake to women with the lowest fluoride intake, their children at age 36 months:

Were 83% more likely to have behavior problems.

Were 18.5% more likely to have symptoms characteristic of autism spectrum disorder.

Were 11.3% more likely to have anxiety symptoms.

Were 19.6% more likely to have somatic complaints (symptoms with no clear cause).

For more details on this study and what it means for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

______________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

_______________________________________________________________________

About The Author

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.

Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”.

Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 45 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

Could Toxic Chemicals Lower Our Child’s IQ?

April 11, 2023 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Is The Science Solid?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

As Earth Day approaches, our thoughts turn to our environment. Most of the concern is with global warming, and rightly so. But should we be concerned about the effects of toxic chemicals in our environment on our health – or, more importantly the health of our children?

The short answer is, “Maybe.” But let’s delve a little deeper.

In a past issue of “Health Tips From the Professor” I examined the evidence suggesting that toxic chemicals in the home could cause childhood asthma. That is alarming because asthma can predispose individuals to other diseases and affects quality of life.

But what if that were only the tip of the iceberg? For example, a recent headline stated: “More Toxic Chemicals [In Our Environment] Are Damaging Children’s Brains”. If that headline is true, it’s downright scary.

The authors of this study suggested that toxic chemicals which are abundant in our environment can cause decreases in IQ and aggressive or hyperactive behavior in children – and that those changes may be permanent.

The Study Behind The Headlines

The paper that generated the headlines (Grandjean & Landrigan, The Lancet Neurology, 13: 330-338, 2014) was a review of the literature, not an actual clinical study.

Based on published clinical studies, the authors identified 11 chemicals commonly found in the environment as developmental neurotoxins (toxins that interfere with normal brain development) based.

This finding compares with 6 developmental neurotoxins that they were able to identify in a similar study in 2006.

The authors were not claiming that the number or amount of neurotoxic chemicals changed between 2006 and 2014. They were saying that science has advanced to the point where we can classify six more chemicals that have been in our environment for years as developmental neurotoxins.

Even more worrisome, the authors postulate that many more environmental neurotoxins remain undiscovered, and these environmental neurotoxins come from many sources.

Some are industrial pollutants.

Some are persistent groundwater contaminants.

Some are insecticides and herbicides used in agriculture.

Some are found in common household products and furnishings.

Could Toxic Chemicals Lower Our Child’s IQ?

To answer that question, you need to look at some of the studies they cited in their review. For example:

Elevated blood lead levels in children are associated with as much as a 7-point decrease in IQ (Lamphear et al, Environmental Health Perspectives, 113: 894-899, 2005).

The effects of many of the neurotoxic chemicals they identified on IQ were difficult to quantify. However, the authors estimated that average exposure of US children to just 3 of the best studied chemical neurotoxins (lead, methylmercury, and organophosphate pesticides) was sufficient to lower their average IQ by 1.6 points.

The authors spoke of the environmental neurotoxins they identified as representing a “silent pandemic of a chemical brain drain” that could cost the US economy billions of dollars.

One of the blog posts I read on this topic summarized the consequences in a very graphic manner. It said:

If one child’s IQ is reduced by 5 points, it doesn’t appear to make a big difference. For example, that child might be:

A little slower to learn.
A little shorter of attention.
A little less successful at tests and at work.

That might result in $90,000 in lost lifetime earnings.

However, if the average IQ of every child in the US were decreased by 5 points, the effect becomes significant:

Only half as many members of the next generation would be “intellectually gifted”.
Twice as many of the next generation would be “intellectually impaired”.
Lost productivity could be in the billions.

Of course, statements like that are a bit over the top. Drs. Grandjean and Landrigan did not claim that the net effect of the chemicals they identified was a 5-point drop in IQ. Nor did they claim that all US children were affected equally.

Still, it’s enough to make you think.

Are Toxic Chemicals Causing Behavior Problems?

The authors cited numerous studies linking the chemical neurotoxins they identified to aggression and hyperactivity. But perhaps the most compelling reason to suspect that environmental chemicals may be affecting brain development is the spiraling incidence of developmental disorders such as autism and ADHD. For example:

Autism has increased by 78% since 2007 and now affects 1 of 88 eight-year-old children.

ADHD has increased by 43% since 2003 and now affects 11% of children aged 4-17.

Some of this increase could be due to better diagnosis of these conditions, but nobody believes that all of it is due to improved diagnosis. The authors claim that much of this increase is likely due to environmental exposure to the kinds of developmental neurotoxins they identified.

Is The Science Solid?

Of course, you have seen these kinds of warnings before. Is this crazy talk, or is it something you should take seriously? What is the truth? Is the science solid?

The problem is this is a very difficult area of research. You can’t do a gold standard double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Nobody in their right mind would give one group of children toxic chemicals and the other group a placebo.

The studies cited in this paper were mostly population studies. Basically, this means that they compared children with exposure to certain toxic chemicals to a control group that was as similar as possible to the first group except that their exposure to the toxic chemicals was less.

The limitation of this kind of study is obvious. We are usually comparing children from different locations or of different backgrounds. We almost never know if we have controlled for all possible variables so that the groups are truly identical.

Consequently, it becomes important to ask how many studies come to the same conclusion. For some of the toxic chemicals, such as lead, methylmercury, and organophosphate pesticides, the weight of evidence is very strong. For some of the newer additions to their list of developmental neurotoxins, it is clear that the chemicals have neurotoxic properties, but the significance of those effects on the developing human brain are hard to quantify at this point.

So, rather than ask, “Is this true?”, we should ask, “What if it were true?” The consequences of lowered IQ and developmental behavioral problems are so significant that it may not make sense to wait until we have unassailable scientific evidence before we act.

We don’t need to panic. The science isn’t that strong. But we should take sensible precautions. The developmental neurotoxins identified in this study come from many sources. Here are the sources and sensible precautions we can take.

Some are industrial pollutants. For these, we need to lobby for better environmental regulation.

Some are persistent groundwater contaminants. For these we need to drink purified water whenever possible.

Some are insecticides and herbicides used in agriculture. For these we need to buy organic, locally grown produce whenever possible.

Some are found in common household products and furnishings. For these we need to become educated label readers and use non-toxic products in our home whenever possible.

The Bottom Line:

1) A recent review claims that there is a good scientific basis for classifying at least 11 environmental chemicals as developmental neurotoxins that are likely to reduce IQ and contribute to behavioral problems in US children.

2) The science behind the claims in this review is solid, but not iron clad. This is an area of science where it is virtually impossible to come up with a definitive conclusion.

3) However, there are times when we need to simply ask ourselves: “What if it were true?” The consequences of lowered IQ and developmental behavioral problems are so significant that it may not make sense to wait until we have unassailable scientific evidence before we act.

4) We all need to be guardians of our personal environment. The article above identifies practical steps each of us can take.

For more details and to learn what practical steps you can take to reduce your family’s exposure to toxic chemicals, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

How Much Omega-3s Do Children Need?

September 6, 2022 by Dr. Steve Chaney

What Does This Study Mean For Your Children?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

It is back to school time again. If you have children, you are probably rushing around to make sure they are ready.

Backpack…Check.
Books…Check
School supplies…Check
Omega-3s…???

Every parent wants their child to do their best in school. But do they need omega-3s to do their best? I don’t need to tell you that question is controversial.

Some experts claim that omega-3 supplementation in children improves their cognition. [Note: Cognition is defined as the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses. In layman’s terms that means your child’s ability to learn.]

Other experts point out that studies in this area disagree. Some studies support these claims. Others don’t. Because the studies disagree these experts conclude there is no good evidence to support omega-3 supplementation in children.

The authors of this study (ISM van der Wurff et al, Nutrients, 12: 3115, 2020) took a different approach. They asked why these studies disagreed. They hypothesized that previous studies disagreed because there is a minimal dose of omega-3s needed to achieve cognitive benefits in children. In short, they were asking how much omega-3s do children need.

They based their hypothesis on recent studies showing that a minimum dose of omega-3s is required to show heart health benefits in adults.

What Have We Learned From Studies on Omega-3s And Heart Health?

The breakthrough in omega-3/heart health studies came with the development of something called the omega-3 index. Simply put, omega-3s accumulate in our cell membranes. The omega-3 index is the percent omega-3s in red blood cell membranes and is a good measure of our omega-3 status.

Once investigators began measuring the omega-3 index in their studies and correlating it with heart health, it became clear that:

An omega-3 index of ≤4% correlated with a high risk of heart disease.

An omega-3 index of ≥8% correlated with a low risk of heart disease.

Most Americans have an omega-3 index in the 4-6% range.

Clinical studies in which participants’ omega-3 index started in the low range and increased to ~8% through supplementation generally showed a positive effect of omega-3s on reducing heart disease risk. [I say generally because there are other factors in study design that can obscure the effect of omega-3s.]

This is the model that the authors adopted for their study. They asked how much omega-3s do children need to show a positive effect of omega-3s on their cognition (ability to learn).

How Was The Study Done?

The authors included 21 studies in their analysis that met the following criteria:

All studies were placebo controlled randomized clinical trials.

The participants were 4-25 years old and had not been diagnosed with ADHD.

Supplementation was with the long-chain omega-3s DHA and/or EPA.

The trial assessed the effect of omega-3 supplementation on cognition.

I do not want to underestimate the difficulties the authors faced in their quest. The individual studies differed in:

The dose of omega-3s.

- The relative amount of DHA and EPA.

- Whether omega-3 index was measured. Only some of the studies measured fatty acid levels in the blood. The authors were able to calculate the omega-3 index in these studies.

How cognition (ability to learn) was measured.

The age of the children.

- 20 of the studies were done with children (4-12 years old) or late adolescents (20-25 years old).

- Only one study was done on early to middle adolescents (12-20 years old).

All these variables influence the outcome and could obscure the effect of omega-3s on cognition.

In short, determining the omega-3 dose-response for an effect on cognition was a monumental task. It was like searching for a needle in a haystack. These authors did a remarkable job.

How Much Omega-3s Do Children Need?

Here is what the scientists found when they analyzed the data:

60% of the studies in which an omega-3 index of ≥6% was achieved showed a beneficial effect of omega-3 supplementation on cognition (ability to learn) compared to 20% of the studies that did not achieve an omega-3 index of 6%.

- That is a 3-fold difference in effectiveness once a threshold of 6% omega-3 index was reached.

50% of the studies in which a dose of ≥ 450 mg/day of DHA + EPA was used showed a beneficial effect of omega-3 supplementation on cognition (ability to learn) compared to 25% of the studies that used <450 mg/day DHA + EPA.

- That is a 2-fold difference in effectiveness once a threshold of 450 mg/day DHA + EPA was given.

The authors concluded, “Daily supplementation of ≥450 mg/day DHA and/or EPA and an increase in the omega-3 index to >6% makes it more likely to show efficacy [of omega-3s] on cognition (ability to learn) in children and adolescents.”

What Does This Study Tell Us?

It is important to understand what this study does and does not tell us.

This study does not:

Prove that omega-3 supplementation can improve cognition (ability to learn) in children and adolescents.

Define optimal levels of DHA + EPA.

Tell us whether DHA, EPA, or a mixture is better.

It was not designed to do any of these things. It was designed to give us a roadmap for future studies. It tells us how to design studies that can provide definitive answers to these questions.

This study does:

Define a threshold dose of DHA + EPA for future studies (450 mg/day).

Tells us how to best use the omega-3 index in future studies. To obtain meaningful results:

- Participants should start with an omega-3 index of 4% or less.

- Participants should end with an omega-3 index of 6% or greater.

In my opinion, future studies would also be much more effective if scientists in this area of research could agree on a single set of cognitive measures to be used in all subsequent studies.

In short, this study provides critical information that can be used to design future studies that will be able to provide definitive conclusions about omega-3s and cognition in children.

What Does This Study Mean For Your Children?

As a parent or grandparent, you probably aren’t interested in optimizing the design of future clinical studies. You want answers now.

Blood tests for omega-3 index are available, but they are not widely used. And your insurance may not cover them.

So, for you the most important finding from this study is that 450 mg/day DHA + EPA appears to be the threshold for improving a child’s cognition (their ability to learn).

450 mg/day is not an excessive amount. The NIH defines adequate intakes for omega-3s as follows:

4-8 years: 800 mg/day
9-13 years: 1 gm/day for females, 1.2 gm/day for males
14-18 years: 1.1 gm/day for females and 1.6 gm/day for males.
With at least 10% of that coming from DHA + EPA

Other organizations around the world recommend between 100 mg/day and 500 mg/day DHA + EPA depending on the age and weight of the child and the organization.

Most children need supplementation to reach adequate omega-3 intake. The NIH estimates the average child only gets around 40 mg/day omega-3s from their diet. No matter which recommendation you follow, it is clear that most children are not getting the recommended amount of DHA + EPA in their diet.

Genetics.
Diet.
Environment.
The value placed on learning by parents and peers.

Supplementation is just one factor in your child’s ability to learn. But it is one you can easily control. . And if your child is like most, he or she is probably not getting enough omega-3s in their diet.

The Bottom Line

It is back to school time again. Every parent wants their child to do their best in school. But do they need omega-3s to do their best? I don’t need to tell you that question is controversial.

Some studies support these claims, but others don’t. Because the studies disagree some experts conclude there is no good evidence to support omega-3 supplementation in children.

The authors of a recent study took a different approach. They asked why these studies disagreed. They hypothesized that previous studies disagreed because there was a minimal dose of omega-3s needed to achieve cognitive benefits in children. They asked how much omega-3s children need.

They analyzed the data from 21 previous studies looking at the effect of omega-3 supplementation on cognition (ability to learn) in children and adolescents. Their analysis showed:

60% of the studies in which an omega-3 index of ≥6% was achieved showed a beneficial effect of omega-3 supplementation on cognition (ability to learn) compared to 20% of the studies that did not achieve an omega-3 index of 6%.

- That is a 3-fold difference in effectiveness once a threshold of 6% omega-3 index was reached.

50% of the studies in which a dose of ≥ 450 mg/day of DHA + EPA was used showed a beneficial effect of omega-3 supplementation on cognition (ability to learn) compared to 25% of the studies that used <450 mg/day DHA + EPA.

- That is a 2-fold difference in effectiveness once a threshold dose of 450 mg/day DHA + EPA was given.

The authors concluded, “Daily supplementation of ≥450 mg/day DHA + EPA and an increase in the omega-3 index to >6% makes it more likely to show efficacy [of omega-3s] on cognition (ability to learn) in children and adolescents.”

For more details on the study and what it means for your children and grandchildren, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Does Maternal Vitamin D Affect Childhood ADHD?

July 7, 2020 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Can ADHD Be Prevented?

If you are pregnant, or of childbearing age, should you be supplementing with vitamin D? Increasingly, the answer appears to be yes.

1) Based on blood 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels (considered the most accurate marker of vitamin D status):

- 8-11% of pregnant women in the US are deficient in vitamin D (<30 nmol/L).

- 25% of pregnant women have insufficient vitamin D status (30-49 nmol/L).

In short, that means around 1/3 of pregnant women in the US have insufficient or deficient levels of vitamin D. The effect of inadequate vitamin D during pregnancy is not just an academic question.

2) The Cochrane Collaboration (considered the gold standard for evidence-based medicine) has recently concluded that supplementation with vitamin D reduces the risk of significant complications during pregnancy.

3) Another recent study found that inadequate vitamin D status during pregnancy delayed several neurodevelopmental milestones in early childhood, including gross motor skills, fine motor skills, and social development.

If neurodevelopmental milestones are affected, what about ADHD? Here the evidence is not as clear. Some studies have concluded that vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy increases the risk of ADHD in the offspring. Other studies have concluded there is no effect of vitamin D deficiency on ADHD.

Why the discrepancy between studies?

Most of the previous studies have been small. Simply put, there were too few children in the study to make statistically reliable conclusions.

Most of the studies measured maternal 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels in the third trimester or in chord blood at birth. However, it is during early pregnancy that critical steps in the development of the nervous system take place.

Thus, there is a critical need for larger studies that measure maternal vitamin D status in the first trimester of pregnancy. This study (M Sucksdorff et al, Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 2020, in press) was designed to fill that need.

How Was The Study Done?

This study compared 1,067 Finnish children born between 1998 and 1999 who were subsequently diagnosed with ADHD and 1,067 matched controls without ADHD. There were several reasons for choosing this experimental group.

Finland is among the northernmost European countries, so sun exposure during the winter is significantly less than for the United States and most other European countries. This time period also preceded the universal supplementation with vitamin D for pregnant women that was instituted in 2004.

Consequently, maternal 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels were significantly lower than in most other countries. This means that a significant percentage of pregnant women were deficient in vitamin D, something not seen in most other studies. For example:

- 49% of pregnant women in Finland were deficient in vitamin D (25-hydoxyvitamin D <30 nmol/L) compared to 8-11% in the United States.

- 33% of pregnant women in Finland had insufficient vitamin D status (25-hydroxyvitamin D 30-49.9 nmol/L) compared to 25% in the United States.

Finland, like many European countries, keeps detailed health records on its citizens. For example:

- The Finnish Prenatal Study collected data, including maternal 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels during the first trimester), for all live births between 1991 and 2005.

- The Care Register for Health Care recorded, among other things, all diagnoses of ADHD through 2011.

Thus, this study was ideally positioned to compare maternal 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels during the first trimester of pregnancy with a subsequent diagnosis of ADHD in the offspring. The long-term follow-up was important to this study because the average age of ADHD diagnosis was 7 years (range = 2-14 years).

Does Maternal Vitamin D Affect Childhood ADHD?

The answer to this question appears to be a clear, yes.

If you divide maternal vitamin D levels into quintiles:

Offspring of mothers in the lowest vitamin D quintile (25-hydroxyvitamin D of 7.5-21.9 nmol/L) were 53% more likely to develop ADHD than offspring of mothers in the highest vitamin D quintile (49.5-132.5 nmol/L).

When you divide maternal vitamin D levels by the standard designations of deficient (<30 nmol/L), insufficient (30-49.9 nmol/L), and sufficient (≥50 nmol/L):

Offspring of mothers who were deficient in vitamin D were 34% more likely to develop ADHD than children of mothers with sufficient vitamin D status.

The authors concluded: “This is the first population-based study to demonstrate an association between low maternal vitamin D during the first trimester of pregnancy and an elevated risk for ADHD diagnosis in offspring. If these findings are replicated, they may have public health implications for vitamin D supplementation and perhaps changing lifestyle behaviors during pregnancy to ensure optimal maternal vitamin D levels.”

Can ADHD Be Prevented?

I realize that this is an emotionally charged title. If you have a child with ADHD, the last thing I want is for you to feel guilty about something you may not have done. So, let me start by acknowledging that there are genetic and environmental risk factors for ADHD that you cannot control. That means you could have done everything right during pregnancy and still have a child who develops ADHD.

Having said that, let’s examine things that can be done to reduce the risk of giving birth to a child who will develop ADHD, starting with vitamin D. There are two aspects of this study that are important to keep in mind.

#1: The increased risk of giving birth to a child who develops ADHD was only seen for women who were vitamin D deficient. While vitamin D deficiency is only found in 8-11% of pregnant mothers in the United States, that is an average number. It is more useful to ask who is most likely to be vitamin D deficient in this country. For example:

Fatty fish and vitamin D-fortified dairy products are the most important food sources of vitamin D. Fatty fish are not everyone’s favorite and may be too expensive for those on a tight budget. Many people are lactose intolerant or avoid milk for other reasons. If you are not eating these foods, you may not be getting enough vitamin D from your diet. This is particularly true for vegans.

If you have darker colored skin, you may have trouble making enough vitamin D from sunlight. If you are also lactose intolerant, you are in double trouble with respect to vitamin D sufficiency.

Obesity affects the distribution of vitamin D in the body. So, if you are overweight, you may have low 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels in your blood.

The vitamin D RDA for pregnant and lactating women is 600 IU, but many multivitamin and prenatal supplements only provide 400 IU. If you are pregnant or of childbearing age, it is a good idea to look for a multivitamin or prenatal supplement that provides at least 600 IU, especially if you are in one of the high risk groups listed above.

Some experts recommend 2,000 to 4,000 IU of supplemental vitamin D. I would not recommend exceeding that amount without discussing it with your health care provider first.

Finally, for reasons we do not understand, some people have a difficult time converting vitamin D to the active 25-hydroxyvitamin D and 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D in their bodies. If you are pregnant or of childbearing age, it is a good idea to have your blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels determined and discuss with your health care provider how much vitamin D you should be taking. Many people need more than 600 IU to reach vitamin D sufficiency status.

#2: Maternal vitamin D deficiency has a relatively small effect (34%) on the risk of the offspring developing ADHD. That means assuring adequate vitamin D status during pregnancy should be part of a holistic approach for reducing ADHD risk. Other factors to consider are:

Low maternal folate and omega-3 status.

Smoking, drug, and alcohol use.

Obesity.

Sodas and highly processed foods.

Alone, each of these factors has a small and uncertain influence on the risk of your child developing ADHD. Together, they may play a significant role in determining your child’s risk of developing ADHD.

In closing, there are three take-home lessons I want to leave you with:

1) The first is that there is no “magic bullet”. There is no single action you can take during pregnancy that will dramatically reduce your risk of giving birth to a child who will develop ADHD. Improving your vitamin D, folate, and omega-3 status; avoiding cigarettes, drugs, and alcohol; achieving a healthy weight; and eating a healthy diet are all part of a holistic approach for reducing the risk of your child developing ADHD.

2) The second is that we should not think of these actions solely in terms of reducing ADHD risk. Each of these actions will lead to a healthier pregnancy and a healthier child in many other ways.

3) Finally, if you have a child with ADHD and would like to reduce the symptoms without drugs, I recommend this article.

The Bottom Line

A recent study looked at the correlation between maternal vitamin D status during the first trimester of pregnancy and the risk of ADHD in the offspring. The study found:

Offspring of mothers who were deficient in vitamin D were 34% more likely to develop ADHD than children of mothers with sufficient vitamin D status.

In the article above I discuss what this study means for you and other factors that increase the risk of giving birth to a child who will develop ADHD.

For more details read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Are Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms Affected By Diet?

July 2, 2019 by Dr. Steve Chaney

What Can You Do To Reduce ADHD Symptoms In Your Child?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder rates for American children are skyrocketing. One study reported that the percentage of children diagnosed with ADHD has increased by 43% between 2003 and 2011. Another study reported an increase of 67% between 1997 and 2015. Currently, 10-12% of American schoolchildren are diagnosed with ADHD. That amounts to around 6 million children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

The reason for the rapid increase in ADHD symptoms is controversial.

Some experts claim the increase simply reflects more accurate diagnostic protocols.
Others say the increase is driven by aggressive marketing of ADHD drugs by pharmaceutical companies.
Others feel the cause is environmental, with the worsening American diet and increased exposure to toxins in everyday consumer products being named as the most likely culprits.

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Side Effects

62% of children diagnosed with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder are taking ADHD medications. These medicines reduce, but do not eliminate, ADHD symptoms. But the improvements come at a high price. Side effects include:

Sleeping problems.
Reduced taste perception.
Loss of appetite.
Anxiety, moodiness, and irritability.
Headaches and stomachaches.

Because of the side effects of ADHD medicines, parents often look for more natural solutions. Many of them report that improving their child’s diet reduces their child’s ADHD symptoms as well or better than ADHD medications. Are their opinions accurate, or do the child’s ADHD symptoms improve just because their parents are paying more attention to them?

The latest headlines proclaim that improving a child’s diet does not reduce their ADHD symptoms. Are those headlines correct, or do parents know something that the scientists missed?

To answer those questions, we should start by looking at the study (https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/nxy273) behind the headlines.

How Was The Study Done?

The authors of this study analyzed data from 3680 children who were involved in the Generation R Study in Rotterdam, Netherlands. This study measured the association between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder symptoms and diet quality.

However, this was not a simple association study. It was something called a prospective cohort study. That means rather than measuring the association at a single time like most studies, this study measured ADHD symptoms at age 6 and 10 and diet quality at age 8.

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder symptoms were assessed by using parent-reported questionnaires. Dietary intake was assessed by using a validated food frequency questionnaire filled out by the parents. Diet quality was based on comparing a child’s dietary intake to the Dutch dietary recommendations for children (Which are not significantly different from the US dietary recommendations).

Are Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms Affected By Diet?

The results of the study were confusing:

ADHD symptoms at age 6 were associated with poorer diet quality at age 8.
However, there was no association between diet quality at age 8 and ADHD symptoms at age 10.

The author’s conclusions, which generated the headlines you may have seen, were even more confusing.

Based on the first finding (Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder symptoms at age 6 associated with poorer diet quality at age 8), they concluded “…children with more ADHD symptoms may be at a higher risk of an unhealthy diet.” They hypothesized:

ADHD symptoms may cause “…impulsive eating of highly palatable foods or no patience to eat vegetables…”
“…parents try to soothe difficult behavior of their children by offering meals, snacks, and beverages children prefer instead of healthy choices.”

Based on the second finding (diet quality at age 8 having no relationship with ADHD symptoms at age 10), they concluded “…overall diet quality does not affect ADHD risk.”

In short, they concluded that Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder caused poor diets, but poor diets did not cause ADHD.

Are The Conclusions Of This Study Accurate?

The authors identified several important limitations of their study. For example, they acknowledged:

They relied on parent reporting of both ADHD symptoms and dietary intake.
- Parents may have found it difficult to assess ADHD behavior in their children.
- Parents may not have known what their children consumed at school or during after-school care.

Both dietary intake and ADHD symptoms may change over time.
- ADHD symptoms are different at age 6 and 10, so two different ADHD assessment questionnaires were used.
- Parents have less control (and knowledge) of their child’s diet at age 10 than at age 8. The dietary assessment at age 8 might not have been valid for the children two years later.

However, to me the two biggest weakness of the study were:

All the children in the study had ADHD symptoms at both ages 6 and 10. These were the same children! That makes the fact that ADHD symptoms correlated with diet quality at age 6, but not at age 10 highly suspect.
ADHD symptoms and diet quality were measured at different times. This is a bizarre experimental design. The study would have been much stronger if the authors had measured both diet quality and ADHD symptoms at each age.

In short, this study is fatally flawed. The conclusions of the study are inaccurate. You should ignore the headlines.

What Can You Do To Reduce Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms In Your Child?

The recent study does illustrate the difficulty in proving diet-ADHD interactions. The truth is ADHD is a complex condition. It is affected by genetics, environment, family interactions, and food. This is best illustrated by a review written by two pediatricians specializing in ADHD that I featured in ADHD Diet vs Medication of “Health Tips From The Professor.”

The authors of the review described multiple nutritional approaches that reduce ADHD symptoms. The catch was each nutritional intervention only worked for some children. Parents needed to be willing to find what works best for their child by trial and error. Let me give some examples.

Eliminating Food Additives: The idea that food additives cause ADHD symptoms originated with the Feingold diet which was popularized in the 1970s. The Feingold diet eliminated food additives, foods with salicylates (luncheon meats, sausage, hot dogs), drinks containing artificial colors and flavors, and chemical preservatives (e.g. BHA and BHT). After clinical studies showed that only 6% percentage of children benefitted from this diet, it fell out of favor.

However, the experts who pooh-poohed the diet missed a key point. Yes, 6% is a very small percentage of the general population. However, if you are one of those parents whose child is in the 6%, this approach works wonders. A recent study showed that when children with suspected sensitivity to food additives were challenged with food colors, 65-89% of them displayed ADHD sensitivities.

My recommendation: Food additives are not one of the five essential food groups. There is no reason not to eliminate food additives from your child’s diet, and it might make a world of difference for their ADHD symptoms.

Adding Omega-3 Fatty Acids: The authors of the review reported that several studies have shown children with ADHD tend to have low levels of omega-3 fatty acids. They also cited several studies which showed significant improvement in reading skills and reductions in ADHD symptoms when children with ADHD were give omega-3 supplements. It was usually the children with the lowest omega-3 status who showed the biggest improvement in ADHD symptoms.

The pediatricians who wrote the review routinely use doses of 300-600 mg of omega-3s with their ADHD patients. They find that this intervention reduces ADHD symptoms in many children but does not completely eliminate the need for medications.

My recommendation: Whether adding omega-3s will help your child is anyone’s guess. However, it is a natural approach with no side effects. It is definitely worth trying.

Adding Iron and Zinc: Some studies have suggested that iron and zinc deficiencies may be associated with ADHD symptoms.

My recommendation: A good children’s multivitamin should be sufficient to eliminate these deficiencies.

Eliminating Sugar: This recommendation is controversial, but the authors of the review said it helps some of the children they treat reduce their ADHD symptoms.

My recommendation: Reducing intake of refined sugars in your child’s diet makes sense for many reasons, especially considering the role of sugar intake in obesity. If it also reduces ADHD symptoms, that is an added benefit.

Eating A Healthy Diet: Several studies have shown that children eating “Healthy” diets (fish, chicken, vegetables, fresh fruit, whole grains & low fat dairy products) have fewer ADHD symptoms than children eating “Western” diets (Fast foods, red meat, processed meats, processed snacks, high fat dairy products & soft drinks).

My recommendation: Again, this is an approach that makes sense for many reasons. If you and your family were to follow a “Healthy” diet instead of a “Western” diet, it would likely have numerous health benefits. Plus, you would automatically remove ADHD triggers such as food additives and sugar from your child’s diet.

Eliminating Food Sensitivities: If you have tried everything and your child’s ADHD symptoms are as bad as ever, your child may have a sensitivity to a perfectly healthy food. Even natural foods can be a problem for children with food sensitivities, and it appears that there may be a large percentage of hyperactive children with food sensitivities. The authors of the review reported that elimination diets (diets that eliminate all foods which could cause food sensitivity) improve behavior in 76-82% of hyperactive children.

Even though this approach can be very effective they don’t normally recommend it for their patients because it is difficult and time-consuming. The elimination diet is very restrictive and needs to be followed for a few weeks. Then individual foods need to be added back one at a time until the offending food(s) are identified. (They also reported that antigen testing is not a particularly effective way of identifying food sensitivities associated with hyperactivity).

My recommendation: I view this as something to be tried after all other natural approaches have failed. However, if there is a particular food that causes hyperactivity in your child, identifying it and eliminating it from their diet could be something that would benefit them for the rest of their life.

The Bottom Line

You may have seen recent headlines suggesting that healthy diets do not reduce ADHD symptoms. In fact, the study behind the headlines concluded that ADHD may cause poor diets, but poor diets do not cause ADHD.

My mission in writing “Health Tips From the Professor” is to analyze the studies behind the headlines and tell you whether you can believe the headlines or not.

In this case my analysis is clear-cut.

The study is fatally flawed.
Its conclusions are inaccurate.
You can forget the headlines.

However, the study does illustrate the difficulty in proving diet-ADHD interactions. The truth is ADHD is a complex condition. It is affected by genetics, environment, family interactions, and food.

There are multiple nutritional approaches that reduce ADHD symptoms. The catch is each nutritional intervention only works for some children. Parents need to be willing to find what works best for their child by trial and error. Here are some of the nutritional approaches that have merit:

Eliminate food additives.
Add omega-3s.
Add a children’s multivitamin.
Eliminate added sugars.
Eat a healthy diet.
Eliminate food sensitivities.

For more details read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Are ADHD Symptoms Reduced by Omega-3s?

September 4, 2018 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Can Natural Approaches Cure ADHD?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

You keep seeing headlines saying that omega-3 fatty acids can help children with ADHD. But your pediatrician doesn’t recommend them. Why not? Is the story about omega-3s helping with ADHD symptoms just another myth created by supplement companies wanting to lighten your wallet? Or, is your doctor not keeping up with the latest scientific advances? As usual, the truth lies somewhere in between.

This week I will discuss the latest study (J.P-C. Chang et al, Neuropyschopharmacology, 43: 534-545, 2018) on omega-3s and ADHD symptoms. It provides an excellent update on the role of omega-3s in reducing ADHD symptoms.

How Was The Study Done?

The study was a meta-analysis. Meta-analyses combine the data from multiple studies. Their strength comes from the fact that they include data from subjects of different backgrounds and ethnicity. However, a meta-analysis can never be stronger than the studies it includes in its analysis. Simply put, if it combines data from poorly designed studies, it is no better than the weakest study.

The problem is that there have been a lot of poorly designed studies in this area of research. Some studies have included both children and adults. Others included subjects with psychiatric diagnoses other than ADHD. Still others combined omega-3 supplementation with other vitamins and nutrients. Finally, some used inadequate measures of ADHD symptoms and cognitive function. Because the design of previous studies has been so varied, the results have been conflicting. Some studies have found that omega-3 supplementation reduced ADHD symptoms. Others found no benefit.

Because of the confusion arising from poorly designed studies, the authors of this study applied very rigorous criteria in selecting the studies to be included in their meta-analysis. Their criteria were:

The studies were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of mega-3 supplementation with DHA or EPA alone or in combination.
Participants were school-aged children (4-12 years) and adolescents (13-17 years) who had a diagnosis of ADHD.
The study measured clinical symptoms of ADHD as reported by parents. Some also included reports by teachers. When cognitive data were included, the studies relied on well-established cognitive tests.
The data allowed a calculation of effect size (this is a statistical requirement that simply says the quality of the data were good enough to reliably calculate the difference between the supplemented and control groups).
The publications were in peer reviewed journals.

They ended up with seven studies with a total of 534 subjects (318 received omega-3s and 216 received a placebo).

They also performed a separate metanalysis of studies that have measured omega-3 levels in school-aged children and adolescents who had been diagnosed with ADHD. The criteria for inclusion in this metanalysis were similarly rigorous. They ended up including nine studies totaling 558 subjects, 297 with ADHD and 261 controls in this meta-analysis.

Do Omega-3s Reduce ADHD Symptoms?

The results from the first meta-analysis were:

Omega-3 supplementation significantly improved parental reports of total ADHD symptoms scores as well as scores of inattention and hyperactivity.
When the children were given cognitive performance tests, the omega-3 supplemented group performed better than the placebo group when tested for omission errors (for example, a number or word left out in a memory test) and commission errors (an incorrect number or word in a memory test).
A dose of EPA + DHA of 500 mg/day or greater appeared to be optimal.

The results from the second meta-analysis were:

Children and adolescents with ADHD had significantly lower levels of DHA, EPA, and total omega-3s in their red blood cells (a good measure of omega-3 status) than controls.

The authors concluded: “In summary, there is evidence that omega-3 supplementation improves clinical symptoms and cognitive performances in children and adolescents with ADHD, and that these youth have a deficiency of omega-3 levels. Our findings provide further support to the rationale for using omega-3s as a treatment option for ADHD.”

The authors went on to say: “In the context of ‘personalized medicine,’ it is tempting to speculate that a subpopulation of youth with ADHD and low levels of omega-3s may respond better to omega-3 supplementation, but there are no studies to date attempting this stratification approach [looking at the effect of omega-3 supplementation in the subpopulation with both ADHD and omega-3 deficiency]…Therefore, stratification of ADHD children by omega-3 levels…could be one approach to optimize the therapeutic effects of omega-3 supplementation.”

Basically, they are suggesting that the benefits of omega-3 supplementation are likely to be greatest for those children with ADHD who are also omega-3 deficient. They are also saying that future studies should measure omega-3 status before and after supplementation so that the true benefit of omega-3 supplementation can be determined. I agree

What Does This Mean For You?

This study was very well done. By including only the best designed studies in their meta-analysis, the authors have provided good evidence that omega-3s can be of benefit in reducing ADHD symptoms. The authors also pointed out that low-dose omega-3 supplementation is virtually free of side effects. Thus, this is an option that should be tried first, before considering medications to control ADHD symptoms.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t expect miracles. This was not a huge effect. Not all the ADHD symptoms improved with omega-3 supplementation. Teacher’s reports did not show the same benefits as parent’s reports.

There are two ways to interpret the limitations of omega-3 benefits seen in this meta-analysis.

Clinical studies report the average results for all the children in the study. Your child may not be average. If your child doesn’t like fish, especially the oil, cold-water fish that are rich in omega-3s, they may experience a greater benefit from omega-3 supplementation.
The benefit of omega-3s seen in this meta-analysis is just one facet of a holistic, natural approach for controlling ADHD without drugs. One of the best reviews on natural approaches for controlling ADHD was written by two pediatricians with years of experience dealing with ADHD. I wrote about their review in a previous issue, adhd diet vs medication, of “Health Tips From the Professor”. You should check it out. There was a lot of wisdom in their advice.

The Bottom Line

A recent meta-analysis has reported that omega-3 supplementation improves clinical symptoms and cognitive performances in children and adolescents with ADHD.
The optimal dose appeared to be 500 mg/day or above.
The authors also reported that children with ADHD were more likely to be omega-3 deficient than children without ADHD and suggested that omega-3 supplementation is most likely to be effective for those children who are omega-3 deficient.
The authors also pointed out that low-dose omega-3 supplementation had negligible side-effects, so it should be tried before the child is put on medication.
Omega-3s are just one facet of a holistic, natural approach for reducing ADHD symptoms.

For more details, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

Does Diet for Children with ADHD Matter?

March 7, 2017 by Dr. Steve Chaney

Could A Healthy Diet Help Your Child?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Does diet for children with ADHD matter?

The prevalence of ADHD appears to be skyrocketing. It increased by 42% in just 8 years between 2003 and 2011. Currently, 4.5 million children in the US are on ADHD medication, at a cost to taxpayers of $45 billion.

Unfortunately, ADHD medications come with serious side effects like loss of appetite and delayed growth, sleep disorders, nausea & stomach pains, headaches, moodiness and irritability. Even more worrisome is that many children say they “just don’t feel right” while they are on the drugs. Finally, there is the unintended message we are sending our children that drugs are the solution to their problems.

It is no wonder that millions of parents are looking for more natural solutions for their child’s ADHD. That is why recent headlines like “The Mediterranean Diet Could Help Children with ADHD” generate such interest.

In this issue of Health Tips From the Professor I have looked at the studies behind the headlines to answer your most pressing questions:

Would something as simple as the Mediterranean diet help my child control their ADHD symptoms?

Do they have to adhere to the Mediterranean diet, or would other healthy diets work just as well?

Answering these questions will tell us if diet for children with ADHD matters.

How Was The Study Designed?

The study behind the headlines (A Rios-Hernandez et al, Pediatrics DOI: 10.1542/peds.2016-2027) looked at 60 children and adolescents (ages 6-16) from southern Spain who were newly diagnosed with ADHD and compared them with 60 sex- and age-matched controls without ADHD from the same schools.

A food frequency questionnaire was administered by a trained interviewer and a scoring system called KIDMED was used to evaluate adherence to a Mediterranean-type diet. The study excluded children with more severe psychological problems and any children taking ADHD medications or nutritional supplements.

Does Diet for Children with ADHD Matter?

In a preliminary analysis of the data, the investigators discovered:
- Breastfeeding was associated with decreased risk of ADHD.
- Inactivity was associated with increased risk of ADHD.
- Obesity was associated with increased risk of ADHD.
Of course, the main point of the study was to investigate whether adherence to a Mediterranean-type diet influenced the risk of developing ADHD. The answer to this question was clear cut.
- Adherence to a Mediterranean-type diet significantly reduced the risk of ADHD in both children and adolescents.
So, clearly diet for children with ADHD does matter.

Next, the investigators used the data obtained from the food frequency questionnaires to ask what components of a Mediterranean diet were most influential in reducing the risk of developing ADHD. These results were also very interesting:

Dietary components that decreased the risk of ADHD included:
- Consuming two or more servings of fruit every day (In Spain, the extra servings of fruit were primarily citrus, but presumably other fruits would be just as effective).
- Consuming fresh or cooked vegetables more than once a day.
- Consuming fatty fish on a regular basis (2-3 times a week).
- Consuming grains or rice almost every day.
- Starting the day with a healthy breakfast.
Dietary components that increased the risk of ADHD included:
- Eating at fast food restaurants more than once a week.
- Skipping breakfast.
- High consumption of soft drinks.
- High consumption of candy and sugar.
What Does This Mean For You?

This study clearly showed that adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with a significantly lower incidence of ADHD.

Of course, this study was conducted in southern Spain where a healthy diet is the Mediterranean diet. The question for people in other parts of the world is whether other healthy diets would work just as well.

Based on their detailed study of the effect of individual dietary components, it is reasonable to assume that any healthy diet that…

…emphasized fresh fruits & vegetables, whole grains, omega-3-rich fish, and…

…started the day with a healthy breakfast, and…

…minimized (or eliminated) fast foods, sodas, candy & other sweets…

…would reduce the risk of ADHD.

Plus, this is an approach that has no side effects. Just side benefits.

Finally, if you read the study carefully, it is clear a holistic approach is always best. For example:
- Individual dietary components had small effects on ADHD symptoms.
- When those individual components were combined into a healthy diet, a major reduction in ADHD symptoms was observed.
- The study suggested that reduction in ADHD symptoms would be even greater with a healthy lifestyle that included regular exercise and weight control.
- The authors stated that supplementation could also play a role in reducing ADHD symptoms. They felt the best evidence was for supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids and a multivitamin multimineral supplement.

We can certainly conclude that diet for children with ADHD matters.

The Bottom Line

A recent study in southern Spain has looked at the relationship between adherence to a healthy Mediterranean diet and the risk of developing ADHD symptoms in children and adolescents.

In a preliminary analysis of the data, the investigators discovered:
- Breastfeeding was associated with decreased risk of ADHD.
- Inactivity was associated with increased risk of ADHD.
- Obesity was associated with increased risk of ADHD.
These factors were independent of adherence to a Mediterranean diet.
Adherence to a Mediterranean-type diet significantly reduced the risk of ADHD in both children and adolescents. This was the major finding of the study.
The dietary components in the study that decreased the risk of ADHD were:
- Consuming two or more servings of fruit every day (In Spain, the extra servings of fruit were primarily citrus, but presumably other fruits would be just as effective).
- Consuming fresh or cooked vegetables more than once a day.
- Consuming fatty fish on a regular basis (2-3 times a week).
- Consuming grains or rice almost every day.
- Starting the day with a healthy breakfast.
The dietary components that increased the risk of ADHD were:
- Eating at fast food restaurants more than once a week.
- Skipping breakfast.
- High consumption of soft drinks.
- High consumption of candy and sugar.
Based on their detailed study of the effect of individual dietary components, it is reasonable to assume that any healthy diet that…
- …emphasized fresh fruits & vegetables, whole grains, omega-3-rich fish, and…
- …started the day with a healthy breakfast, and…
- …minimized (or eliminated) fast foods, sodas, candy & other sweets……would reduce the risk of ADHD.
Plus, this is an approach that has no side effects. Just side benefits.
Finally, if you read the study carefully, it is clear a holistic approach is always best. That would include:
- A healthy diet
- regular exercise and weight control.
- Supplementation with omega-3 fatty acids and a multivitamin multimineral supplement.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.