Scientists think genetics could explain how old babies are when they start walking
Whether babies take their first steps at nine or 15 months depends on a lot of factors – including their genes, a new study has found.
New parents wait with bated breath for their babies to begin walking independently, which is an important early sign of child development.
But the exact age that they start hinges on their size, whether they were born early, if they've had the chance to practice walking, and their nutrition, among other conditions.
Now, the study indicates 11 genetic markers can explain about a quarter of the variation in when babies start walking on their own.
Related
No link between COVID vaccines and infection during pregnancy and developmental delays in toddlers
'Parents can provide a constructive environment and support their children, but they're not 100 per cent in control,' Angelica Ronald, the study's senior author and a professor of psychology and genetics at the University of Surrey in the UK, told Euronews Health.
'Genes also influence this timing'.
The study was published in the journal Nature Human Behaviour and included nearly 71,000 children in Norway, the Netherlands, and the UK.
The genes that influence the age at which children learn to walk overlap closely with genes that affect both brain size and how many folds are on the outer layer of the brain, which is associated with cognitive function, the analysis found.
Related
Why experts are warning parents not to give their kids dietary supplements like vitamins
Notably, the genes tied to early walking also overlap with those linked to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
The researchers hypothesised that more active babies with shorter attention spans could move around more, giving them more practice walking earlier.
Meanwhile other research has shown that learning
how to walk late
– beyond around 18 months – can be an early sign of intellectual disabilities.
The new findings 'suggest that the genes influencing the age of onset of walking are quite central to development across a range of areas,' Ronald said.
Related
Young people's eating disorders could be linked to lagging brain development, study finds
Going forward, Roland's team plans to study how genes interact with the environment to shape young children's development, with the goal of identifying the most ideal settings for infants to grow up.
But for now, she said the results should help assuage parents' worries that they aren't doing enough to help their babies walk unassisted.
'We put a lot of emphasis on kids who do things quicker than others,' Ronald said, but 'there are probably advantages to walking later and walking earlier'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
a day ago
- Euronews
Smartphones lead to ‘suicidal thoughts' in children under 13, study
Children shouldn't have access to smartphones until the age of 13, according to a new global study. Those who used smartphones before they turned 13 were more likely to have suicidal thoughts, bad emotional regulation, lower self-worth, aggression, and detachment from reality, according to the study published in the Journal of the Human Development and Capabilities. Girls were more impacted by smartphone use than boys, with 9.5 per cent of female respondents considered 'struggling' with their mental health compared to 7 per cent of males, irrespective of their country of origin, the research added. Kids under 13 were more likely to experience sleep disruptions, cyberbullying and negative family relationships, the study found. Restrict smartphones like alcohol, researchers say The study drew data from the self-reported mental health profiles of 100,000 young people between the ages of 18-24. The study was conducted by a team from the research non-profit Sapien Labs. The researchers generated an overall "mind health" score for each profile based on 47 social, emotional, cognitive, and physical functions. The mind health scores got worse the longer a child had access to a smartphone, the research continued. For example, the score of a child who received a phone at 13 dropped from 30 to just one for those who received a phone at five years old. The results were worse for the 18-20 year-olds than the 21-24 cohort in the responses, which could be due to prolonged screen exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic, the study said. However, the results of smartphone use in under 13s are consistent despite the geographical and social differences that kids have. Lead author Tara Thiagarajan said she'd like to see smartphones restricted to those under 13 and regulated like alcohol and tobacco by government authorities. The move should be paired with restrictions on social media platforms as well as 'mandating digital literacy education and enforcing corporate accountability'. 'I was initially surprised by how strong the results are,' Thiagarajan said. 'However, when you give it due consideration, it does begin to make sense that the younger developing mind is more compromised by the online environment, given their vulnerability and lack of worldly experience'. What regulations are already in place against cellphones? Most of the bans so far against cellphones are happening in Europe's schools, with partial bans in French, Dutch, British, Italian, Hungarian, Spanish, Irish, Swedish, Belgian, Greek, Latvian, Luxembourgish and Finnish classrooms. Some of these countries, including France, the Netherlands, Italy, Luxembourg and some Spanish regions, have complete school-wide bans on mobile phones so they cannot be used at any point during the day. Other European countries, such as Denmark, Cyprus, Bulgaria, and Portugal, are also considering further restrictions on cellphones. For social media, France's artificial intelligence (AI) minister also proposed a European-wide ban on the use of social media for those under 15 years old. Several EU laws, such as the Digital Service Act, the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, and the General Data Protection Regulation, include provisions to shield children from harmful content and protect their data. Last month, EU lawmakers voted to criminalise AI-generated child abuse images, online grooming, livestreaming, sextortion and the age of consent.
Euronews
7 days ago
- Euronews
Why some countries' healthcare spending is more wasteful than others
Wealthy countries spend trillions of euros on health care every year, but not all of them are getting their money's worth, a new analysis has found. Higher levels of health spending are linked to better outcomes, but after a certain point, more money may not be efficient or practical. The more a country spends on medical care, the more it must pay to continue boosting citizens' health, according to the study published in The Lancet Global Health journal. In countries that spend $100 (€85) per capita on health care, for example, spending another $92 (€79) per person earns them an additional year of healthy life. But in countries that spend $5,000 (€4,272) per capita, another healthy year would cost $11,213 (€9,580). 'Countries around the world have made significant progress in converting dollars into health,' wrote the researchers from the US-based Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME). 'However, more reductions in inefficiency need to be made in an era of tightening health-care budgets [and] to maximise the returns on their health care spending'. The researchers determined health spending inefficiency by comparing a country's total health spending – including the amount they spend and how they spend it – to the number of years people there can expect to live in good health. The study included 201 countries and territories, and covered a 28-year period from 1995 to 2022. Drivers of efficient and wasteful spending Globally, health spending became more efficient between 1995 and 2019, but this progress was disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. While it began to recover in 2022, there are still major 'inefficiency gaps' between countries, the analysis found. The United States spends more per capita on healthcare than any other wealthy country. But its system is not particularly efficient, which costs Americans 6.2 years of healthy life. China was the most efficient country with zero waste, meaning it optimised its spending to deliver the best possible health outcomes for its citizens, according to the analysis. Most European countries were considered fairly efficient. Exceptions included Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, and to a lesser extent, the Netherlands, Belgium, Belarus, Finland, Norway, and the United Kingdom. Beyond their actual budgets, the most efficient countries tended to have better governance, greater uptake of primary care, infrastructure that makes it possible for people to access medical services, and more public spending on health care compared with the private sector. Notably, the study does not take into account health care quality, but rather tracks how well a country scores among those with similar levels of spending. The study authors said policymakers could use the findings to maximise their investments in health, which could be particularly important given many countries are facing pressure on their budgets. 'Expanding government-provided health-care coverage would decrease the inefficiency of the health care system,' the researchers argued. 'Countries should also focus on strengthening democracy, building infrastructure, and increasing the use of, and access to, preventive care,' they added.
Euronews
16-07-2025
- Euronews
Why myths around vaccines and autism are so persistent
Another major study has confirmed that routine childhood vaccines do not cause autism. The theory emerged three decades ago and caught fire after a study was published – and later retracted – in a major medical journal in 1998. While the theory has since been discredited in many studies from around the world, the myth still persists. Today, anti-vaccine activists often point to aluminium, which is used in trace amounts in many childhood jabs to increase their effectiveness, to argue that the vaccines are unsafe. Danish researchers investigated this in the latest study, which was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine and included more than one million children born in Denmark between 1997 and 2018. It found that aluminium-containing vaccines do not raise the risk of health issues such as autism spectrum disorder, asthma, or autoimmune disorders. Dr Niklas Andersson, one of the study's authors and a vaccine researcher at Denmark's Statens Serum Institut (SSI), described the results as 'reassuring'. 'We have not found anything that indicates that the very small amount of aluminium used in the childhood vaccination programme increases the risk of 50 different health conditions in childhood," Andersson said in a statement. The researchers said the findings should be used to dispel misinformation about vaccines, which have become a political flashpoint in recent years, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health authorities blame these falsehoods for driving an increase in the number of parents who opt out of routine vaccines, leaving an opening for preventable diseases such as measles and whooping cough to make a comeback in Europe and elsewhere. Since 2010, vaccine coverage has fallen for at least one jab in Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Why the myth sticks around The theory that vaccines cause autism gained ground in the early 2000s, after the British doctor Andrew Wakefield published an article in The Lancet, a leading medical journal, in 1998 speculating that the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine may cause autism. The study was full of methodological flaws and falsified data, and was later retracted. Wakefield, who made money from lawsuits filed against vaccine manufacturers, was also stripped of his medical license. But his ideas were compelling to parents who noticed that their children received the MMR vaccine around the same time they began showing signs of autism. Later studies went on to show that this was effectively a coincidence. While all vaccines come with some risk of side effects, routine childhood jabs are safe and effective – and do not raise the risk of autism, these studies concluded. The myth has stuck around, though, partly because much is still unknown about what actually causes autism, and because diagnoses have risen since the turn of the century. Scientists believe the uptick is due partly to increased awareness around autism and a wider definition of the disorder. They have also been researching whether environmental factors, such as prenatal exposure to air pollution or certain pesticides, may play a role. In April, US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr pledged to identify what causes autism by September as part of a massive research project. Kennedy said scientists would assess the food system, the environment, parenting approaches, and vaccines, in a move widely panned by independent researchers. Anders Hviid, a vaccine researcher at SSI, said large studies like the recent Danish report 'are part of the bulwark against the politicisation of health knowledge, which can damage trust in vaccines'. 'It is absolutely crucial that we clearly separate real science from politically motivated campaigns – otherwise we risk that it is Danish children who pay the price,' Hviid said.
