Comparative Evaluation of Fat Quality in Conventional and Specialist Infant Formulas

TL;DR

This study compares the fat quality in conventional and specialist infant formulas in Poland, finding that goat milk-based formulas have more favorable fatty acid profiles.

Contribution

The study provides new insights into lipid quality indices in infant formulas based on milk source and formula type.

Findings

Goat milk-based formulas have higher caproic and capric acid levels than cow milk-based formulas.

Goat milk-based formulas contain more conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) than other formulas.

Conventional formulas have a more favorable n6/n3 fatty acid ratio compared to specialist formulas.

Abstract

This study assesses the quality of fat in conventional and specialist infant formulas (IFs) available in Poland. The IFs studied were characterized in terms of fatty acid profiles and lipid quality indices. The study material consisted of eight types of conventional and specialist IFs. The determination of fatty acids was carried out using gas chromatography (GC). Lipid quality indices were estimated based on established formulas. Goat milk-based formulas showed significantly higher levels of caproic acid (C6:0) and capric acid (C10:0) than cow milk-based formulas of the same category (initial or follow-on) (p < 0.05). In addition, these IFs stood out in terms of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) content (0.30%) compared to cow and specialist formulas (about 0.20%). It was shown that the average ratio of n6/n3 fatty acids was significantly lower in conventional IFs (6.07:1) compared to specialist IFs (8.10:1). The goat’s milk-based IFs had the most favorable values for individual lipid quality indices (index of desirable fatty acids (DFAs) = 62.46; index of hypercholesterolemic fatty acids (OFAs) = 25.94; index of atherogenicity (AI) = 0.71; index of thrombogenicity (TI) = 0.88; hypocholesterolemic/hypercholesterolemic ratio (H/H) = 2.05), while the specialist S-PH formula was characterized by the lowest DFA value (49.17) and the highest AI and TI indices (1.48 and 1.68). Multivariate analysis clearly classified the division of formulas into two groups—conventional and specialist—based on lipid quality indices. The results obtained provide new information on the variation in the lipid profile of IFs depending on the intended use of the formula and may serve as a basis for further research in this area.

Figures