PEDIATRICS Vol. 65 No. 4 April 1980, pp. 842-843
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hegsted, D. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hegsted, D. M.

Prenatal Nutritional Supplementation

D. Mark Hegsted PhD1

1 Human Nutrition Center, Science and Education Administration, US Department of Agriculture, Washington

My first reaction to this report (pp 683 to 697) is that something must be wrong and I assume many others will react the same way. If feeding pregnant women has an unfavorable effect upon the outcome of pregnancy we are really in a bad way! We need to examine possible reasons for this unanticipated result. I will comment on several of these.

First, the effect observed is small and if the distribution of four or five of the 823 outcomes of pregnancy had been different or distributed differently among the three groups, there would not be much to discuss or question.