REVIEW ER 'S CONCLUSIONS There is no evidence to support feeding with a hydrolysed formula for the prevention of allergy in preference to exclusive breast feeding .
In high risk infants who are unable to be completely breast fed , there is evidence that prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed compared to a cow 's milk formula reduces infant and childhood allergy and infant CMA .
BACKGROUND Allergies and food reactions are common and may be associated with foods including adapted cow 's milk formulas .
Formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been used to treat infants with allergy or food intolerance , and have been advocated for prevention of allergy and food intolerance in infants .
OBJECTIVES To determine whether use of hydrolysed formulas for infant feeding prevents allergy and food intolerance .
If hydrolysed formulas are effective , to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective including extensively and partially hydrolysed formulas .
To determine which infants benefit including infants at low or high risk of allergy and infants receiving early , short term or prolonged formula feeding .
A Comparative Evaluation of Whey Hydrolysate and Whey-Predominant Formulas
Whey hydrolysate formulas are a recent and important innovation in infant feeding . This study compared clinical tolerance and acceptability of a whey hydrolysate formula ( WH ) with those of a whey-predominant formula ( WF ) in 45 infants . Four infants ( 16 % ) who refused to drink WH formula  were eliminated from the study . Mean volume intake was significantly lower for WH ( 120 mL/kg/day ) than for WF ( 147 mL/kg/day ; P < .001 ) . Consequently , mean caloric intake was also significantly different : 80 kcal/kg/day ( WF ) vs 97 kcal/kg/day ( WF ; P < .001 ) . Nevertheless , weight gain from birth to 13 weeks of age was nearly identical in both groups ( 171 % for WH vs 178 % for WF ) . No significant differences were noted in duration of feeding , number of pauses during feeding , number of stools per day , or number of regurgitations per day . The lower rate of caloric intake and the dropout rate of 16 % for WH raise questions about the use of WH formula in normal infants , as has become the case in some Western European regions
REVIEW ER 'S CONCLUSIONS There is no evidence to support feeding with a hydrolysed formula for the prevention of allergy in preference to exclusive breast feeding .
In high risk infants who are unable to be completely breast fed , there is evidence that prolonged feeding with a hydrolysed compared to a cow 's milk formula reduces infant and childhood allergy and infant CMA .
BACKGROUND Allergies and food reactions are common and may be associated with foods including adapted cow 's milk formulas .
Formulas containing hydrolysed proteins have been used to treat infants with allergy or food intolerance , and have been advocated for prevention of allergy and food intolerance in infants .
OBJECTIVES To determine whether use of hydrolysed formulas for infant feeding prevents allergy and food intolerance .
If hydrolysed formulas are effective , to determine what type of hydrolysed formula is most effective including extensively and partially hydrolysed formulas .
To determine which infants benefit including infants at low or high risk of allergy and infants receiving early , short term or prolonged formula feeding .