The ‘DOHaD’ literature argues that stressors encountered at age t ‘program’ individual health at age t+n, and that this programming appears strongest when t defines critical developmental periods including gestation. Accordingly, children of ill-nourished pregnant women suffer greater later life morbidity than do offspring of well-nourished mothers. The possibility that circumstances other than access to nutritious food drive both a mother’s diet and fetal development remains, however, a threat to the inference of programming in utero. Attempts to rule out this threat include tests of the hypothesis that birth cohorts in gestation during famines exhibit shorter life spans than other cohorts. The tests produce conflicting results attributed to confounding by autocorrelation, selective migration and introduction of modern medicine. We offer a test in which neither medicine nor migration nor autocorrelation could obscure the presumed effect. We apply time-series regression methods to the life span of Swedes born between 1751 and 1800 to test the hypothesis that cohorts exposed in utero to the Swedish Famine of 1773 lived shorter lives than expected from trends and other forms of autocorrelation. We use these 50 birth cohorts not only because they included those exposed to severe famine but also because they may well be the only human birth cohorts that completed life unaffected by selective migration and unaided by modern medicine and for which we know life span. We find that the cohort born in 1773 live 4.2 years longer than expected from trends over the last half of the 18th century.

Since its debut in a ground-breaking report by Barker and Osmond in 1986, the concept of the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD) has been further developed in several aspects. Its methodology and conclusions relating to proposed origins and outcomes of early life events have been developing and spreading internationally. Indeed, the DOHaD concept now seems to have influenced many fields of research. This article aims to briefly review why the DOHaD concept is important in biomedical science, how it has developed, is currently developing, and how it should develop in future.

Recently, large-scale trials of behavioural interventions have failed to show improvements in pregnancy outcomes. They have, however, shown that lifestyle support improves maternal diet and physical activity during pregnancy, and can reduce weight gain. This suggests that pregnancy, and possibly the whole periconceptional period, represents a ‘teachable moment’ for changes in diet and lifestyle, an idea that was made much of in the recent report of the Chief Medical Officer for England. The greatest challenge with all trials of diet and lifestyle interventions is to engage people and to sustain this engagement. With this in mind, we propose a design of intervention that aims simultaneously to engage women through motivational conversations and to offer access to a digital platform that provides structured support for diet and lifestyle change. This intervention design therefore makes best use of learning from the trials described above and from recent advances in digital intervention design.

Diethylstilbestrol (DES) is a non-steroidal estrogen that was commonly prescribed during pregnancy from the late 1940s to 1971. A potent endocrine disruptor, prenatal DES exposure has been linked with reproductive tract malformations, adverse pregnancy outcomes, cancer, infertility and earlier menopause. DES was used for years as a growth promoter in animal production. Some animal studies suggest that prenatal DES exposure is associated with obesity and metabolic disturbances. Using data from the National Cancer Institute DES Follow-Up Study, we evaluated the association between DES and adult obesity, weight gain from age 20 to mid-life, central adiposity and height among 2871 prenatally exposed and 1352 unexposed women between 23 and 52 years of age (median 41.5) at baseline in 1994. DES exposure status was confirmed by prenatal medical record review. We used multivariable log-binomial models to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for obesity in 2006, and linear regression to calculate mean differences in body mass index, weight gain, waist circumference and height. The adjusted RR for DES and obesity was 1.09 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.97, 1.22], and RRs were 1.23 (CI: 1.07, 1.42) and 1.05 (CI: 0.91, 1.20) for low and high estimated total DES dose, respectively, compared with no exposure. DES-exposed women gained slightly more weight than unexposed women [mean difference, 0.70 kg (CI: −0.27, 1.66)]. This study suggests that prenatal DES exposure may be associated with a small increase in adult obesity.