Este artículo estará disponible en español en El Tiempo Latino.
In recent months, U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary has amplified unfounded concerns about the safety of seed oils, a subset of vegetable oils used in infant formula. There isn’t evidence these fat sources are harmful to infants.
“Generally, they’re believed to be pro-inflammatory,” Makary said of seed oils on June 4 in an interview on “Fox & Friends,” echoing claims that wellness influencers have spread about seed oils, despite a lack of evidence they are harmful when included in people’s diets, as we’ve written before. “We don’t want babies with general body inflammation. Forty percent of our nation’s kids have a chronic condition. Many of those are tied to inflammation and insulin resistance,” he said.
In a June 6 appearance on Fox News, the commissioner grouped seed oils and other formula ingredients with contaminants. “Moms want baby formula without seed oil, without corn syrup, without added sugar, without arsenic and lead and other heavy metals,” he said.
And in a July 10 statement, while touting his efforts to explore bringing “additional and healthier options without ingredients like seed oils, added sugars and heavy metals to market,” Makary again implied that seed oils are unhealthy and that it’s feasible to remove them from baby formula.
Makary’s statements came as he promoted Operation Stork Speed, an FDA effort announced March 18 to revisit nutrition standards and strategies for reducing contaminants in infant formula. Experts in infant nutrition are broadly supportive of these goals. But the inclusion of seed oils on Makary’s list of concerns is unfounded, experts told us.
“There is no evidence at present” that infant formulas without seed oils constitute healthier choices, Dr. Steven Abrams, a neonatologist who studies infant nutrition at the University of Texas at Austin Dell Medical School, told us via email. He added that he was unaware of available infant formulas in the U.S. or Europe that do not contain seed oils.
“There’s no scientific concern about these seed oils that they are talking about,” Dr. Mark R. Corkins, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center at Le Bonheur Children’s Hospital, also told us. He added that humans need a high-fat diet at the beginning of life and that vegetable oils contain “some of the essential fatty acids that we need for tissues that are fat-dependent.”
There is some scientific basis for concern about which sugars should be used in infant formula, as we’ll explain. But the broad implication that “added sugar” in infant formula is unhealthy is misleading, since breast milk contains the sugar lactose. All formulas need to have at least some added sugar, preferably in the form of lactose.
We asked HHS for support for Makary’s statements implying seed oils and added sugars in baby formula are unhealthy. A spokesperson said that the remarks “reflect a broader goal of aligning FDA oversight with emerging science and evolving public health priorities.”
“The FDA is actively exploring ways to support innovation in the infant formula market that meets the highest standards for infant health, while also addressing parental concerns about specific ingredients such as added sugars, seed oils, and heavy metals,” the spokesperson said.
To be clear, heavy metals are not intentional ingredients in any infant formula. These contaminants, which are naturally present in the environment and are also spread by pollution, can be found at some level in foods and breast milk. A report released by Consumer Reports the same day Operation Stork Speed was announced found variable levels of the contaminants in different formulas. However, levels were within international standards, Abrams and a co-author noted in a perspective piece published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. The article also expressed support for conducting further research and setting standards for heavy metals in infant formula.
Seed Oils Are Standard, Safe Formula Ingredients
Claims on social media about seed oils in infant formula are an extension of unjustified claims from wellness influencers that these oils are harmful when eaten in foods. The evidence in adults doesn’t indicate harm from seed oils — and in fact suggests some possible benefits, particularly when used in place of saturated fat. In baby formula, seed oils are universal because they provide a source of necessary fatty acids.
“Commonly seen statements on social media that seed oils should be completely removed from formulas or that seed oils are not present in formulas originating in Europe are incorrect and inconsistent with the need for essential fatty acids in any sole source nutritional product for infants,” Abrams’ perspective piece said.
Decades ago, the FDA began requiring a minimum amount of an omega-6 fatty acid, linoleic acid, in infant formula to avoid deficiencies in essential fatty acids — or fatty acids that the human body cannot make itself. To meet this fatty acid requirement, formula makers use vegetable oils made from the seeds of plants, such as soybean, safflower and sunflower oil.
The FDA also bases its regulations on the composition of human milk, Abrams said. Human breast milk is relatively high in linoleic acid compared with cow milk. Corkins added that the fat in whole cow milk is “hard to digest” for infants.
The claim that seed oils are “pro-inflammatory” stems from the finding that among the fatty acids, the omega-6 fatty acids “tend to be more involved in the pathways when you have inflammation in your body,” Corkins said, adding that an appropriate level of inflammation is not harmful. A different type of fatty acid, omega-3s, “tend to be more in the pathways that cool things off,” he said, “but that is a generalization, and it’s not all one way or the other.” Humans need some omega-6 fatty acids, he said, and they are recommended as part of a healthy diet by the American Heart Association.
Moreover, research has indicated that consuming linoleic acid — the type of omega-6 fatty acid required in infant formula — does not lead to excess inflammation in the body.
Some influencers who have long misled on seed oils include those who promote animal products. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has himself endorsed replacing seed oil with animal fat, such as when claiming that Americans eating fries are being “unknowingly poisoned” by seed oils and promoting using beef tallow as frying oil.
Calley Means, a health care entrepreneur, special government employee and adviser to Kennedy, long has been raising unwarranted concerns about seed oils in infant formula. “To new parents: IGNORE recommendations on infant formula,” Means posted on X in March 2024, recommending that they instead use a toddler formula without seed oils.
“Toddler formulas are not designed for infants and should not be used for them,” Abrams said. Corkins added that these products “aren’t regulated by the FDA” the way infant formula is and that they do not meet nutrition requirements for infants. Moreover, he said, they are not even necessary for children age 1 and above, who can drink whole milk and eat table food. The White House, where Means is a special government employee, did not reply to a request for comment.
None of this is to say there isn’t room for new research into fat sources in infant formula. Abrams, who participated in a June 4 panel discussion on infant formula at the FDA, has argued in the past that it is time to revisit the FDA’s infant formula nutrient requirements, including those for fats, which were largely established in the 1980s. “Review of guidance is of value for all nutrients,” he told us. Along with the linoleic acids regulations, the FDA has requirements for protein and fat content overall in infant formula, as well as for 27 vitamins and minerals. The agency also inspects infant formula manufacturing facilities and has regulations meant to prevent contamination.
Abrams and a co-author wrote in 2023 that U.S. scientists and regulators should evaluate the evidence on DHA, an omega-3 fatty acid, as well as arachidonic acid, an omega-6 fatty acid, in light of recent European requirements to add DHA to infant formula and related research on the omega-6 acid. These are both often contained in U.S. infant formula. However, it’s unclear what levels are ideal, and there are no FDA requirements guiding their inclusion.
Tom Brenna, an expert on fatty acids at the University of Texas at Austin Dell Medical School, also advocated updating fatty acid regulations for infant formula during the FDA event. “Not all seed oils are the same,” he said, explaining that they have different levels of the various types of fatty acids.
Abrams said at the FDA event that the goal of the review should be to “improve what’s already an effective product.” Infant formula sold in the U.S. “is produced safely, is used safely, helps babies grow safely and has been associated with tens of millions of babies safely making it through infancy,” he said.
Low-Lactose Formulas Are Oversold
As we have said, Makary’s implication that it’s desirable or feasible to remove added sugar from infant formula is misleading, given that all infant formula has at least some added sugar to better mimic breast milk. However, there is some validity to concerns about the type of sugar that is used in infant formula.
Corkins said that infant formula should ideally match breast milk as closely as it can. Lactose is the “primary carbohydrate” in human breast milk, he said. It is “extremely, extremely rare” that an infant is not able to digest lactose, he added, although the enzyme that digests it can fade out in some populations after weaning.
Despite this, infant formulas that use non-lactose sugars, such as corn syrup solids, have become more common over the years. These are often marketed as being gentle and easy for babies to digest.
One study that looked at powdered infant formula bought from physical stores in the U.S. between 2017 and 2019 found that 59% of all formula purchased contained at least some sugar other than lactose. A second study, which looked at data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey between 1999 and 2020, found that the rate of infant formula feeding sessions that included at least some non-lactose carbohydrates increased from around 30% in the first few years studied to 78% in the final years. The rate of formula feeding sessions using formula with corn syrup solids increased from 10% to around 20%.
While babies with a few rare health conditions need low-lactose or lactose-free alternatives, several experts told us that these formulas are being used when they are not necessary.
Still, some social media posts exaggerated the ubiquity of low-lactose formula. Special government employee Means, for instance, in March 2025 posted a screenshot of a formula label on X listing corn syrup as the first ingredient. “This is the best-selling baby formula in America,” Means said, calling out sugar, seed oil and other ingredients. “What the hell are we doing to our kids.”
The pictured formula, Similac Sensitive, is not in fact the “best-selling formula in America,” a spokesman for Abbott, the maker of the product, told us. The company’s most consumed formulas are Similac Advance and Similac 360 Total Care, he said, which are standard formulas that “contain lactose as the primary carbohydrate source.”
An informational page from Abbott also clarified that the formulas listing corn syrup as an ingredient do not include high-fructose corn syrup, the type found in many ultraprocessed foods. Rather, infant formula uses corn syrup or corn syrup solids, which are made of glucose and don’t contain fructose. Some social media posts conflate the two substances.
Regardless, emerging research indicates that formulas relying on non-lactose sugars “do have adverse effects on infants [that] include increased risk for obesity,” Michael Goran, a childhood obesity researcher at the University of Southern California, told us via email. He and his colleagues found that among babies receiving formula through the Women, Infants, and Children program, or WIC, in Southern California between 2012 and 2020, those who received formula containing corn syrup solids had a 10% higher rate of obesity at age 2 and a 7% higher rate at age 4. He told us that the FDA should set a minimum amount of lactose in formula and limit the amount of other sugars. There currently aren’t FDA regulations on the amount or type of sugar in infant formula, he said.
Another study, published in March, indicated an association between added sugar amounts overall in infant formula — including lactose and other sugars — and infant weight gain. Jigna Dharod, a nutrition researcher at the University of North Carolina Greensboro who was the first author of the study, told us in an email that she advocated labeling of added sugar content in infant formula, as well as regulation of the amount of added sugar in formula and increased support for breastfeeding.
Despite widespread agreement that non-lactose sugars are overused, not everyone agrees on the strength of the relationship between carbohydrates in formula and obesity. Abrams called the evidence linking corn syrup solids to a small increased risk of obesity “uncertain.”
Corkins said that studies on sugars in infant formula and excess weight gain “are very complicated to interpret given all of the uncontrolled factors that are in play.” For instance, the number of calories a baby is consuming from formula might matter more than the sugar quantity or source. He said that an association between formula feeding and increased weight gain compared with breastfeeding persists “no matter what formula.”
Editor’s note: FactCheck.org does not accept advertising. We rely on grants and individual donations from people like you. Please consider a donation. Credit card donations may be made through our “Donate” page. If you prefer to give by check, send to: FactCheck.org, Annenberg Public Policy Center, P.O. Box 58100, Philadelphia, PA 19102.