Not breast-feeding increases mothers' risk for type 2 diabetes

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


The benefits of breast-feeding for babies have proved to be myriad, and an increasing number of studies are finding long-term health benefits for mothers, too, including reduced risk of cardiovascular disease and lower odds of some cancers.

A new analysis confirms earlier observations that breast-feeding helps to decrease a mother's risk of developing type 2 diabetes, and suggests that even a single month of lactation can serve a protective effect. Many major U.S. medical organizations currently recommend breast-feeding infants for at least six months.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Researchers behind the new work found that mothers who did not breast-feed at all had about twice the chance of developing type 2 diabetes than mothers who did, even after controlling for other factors, such as age, race and health history. Twenty-seven percent of the mothers who reported not having breast-fed for at least a month had developed type 2 diabetes.

The protective effect against diabetes may surprise many people. "Diet and exercise are widely known to impact the risk of type 2 diabetes, but few people know that breast-feeding also reduces mothers' risk of developing the disease later in life," Eleanor Schwarz of the University of Pittsburgh's Department of Medicine and lead author of the study, said in a prepared statement.

The population-based study asked 2,233 women ages 40 to 78 about their breast-feeding and health history and calculated their body mass index. About two thirds (62 percent) of the women said they had breast-fed a baby for at least a month. And those who reported either having breast-fed exclusively for at least one month or at least in part for six months or more all had lower rates of diabetes than mothers who never breast-fed—but about the same rates as women who had never given birth.

Whereas much previous research has suggested at least six months of lactation was needed for substantial protective effects, the new data "showed significant benefits with only one month of lactation," reported the researchers.

Scientists are still working to understand the mechanisms behind this pattern. Schwarz and her colleagues noted that women who breast-feed tend to be faster to shed the additional visceral fat gained during pregnancy, and animal studies have shown that breast-feeding might increase a woman's insulin sensitivity. Women with a higher risk for diabetes might also be less inclined to breast-feed, the authors noted. "Studies have linked obesity and insulin resistance to difficulties with breast-feeding," and in the study, women who were obese were less likely to have breast-fed.

The findings were published online August 27 in The American Journal of Medicine.

Image courtesy of iStockPhoto/Abu

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe