While prenatal supplementation with protein, lipids, carbohydrates, and micronutrients has been used to improve infant outcomes in undernourished populations since the 1960s with inconsistent results, a flourishing body of literature within biological anthropology has used life history theory to explain why supplemental resources are often allocated to maternal survival and future reproduction and not to the current offspring. To date, however, public health and nutrition researchers have not adopted evolutionary perspectives in designing or analyzing prenatal supplementation studies. The result is a long series of supplementation trials with unpredictable and often disappointing outcomes for women and children, as well as serious lacunae in the understanding of long-term consequences of supplementation for women. The goal of this article is to open a tactical conversation about how to build a bridge between the evolutionary logic of biological anthropology and the evidentiary standards and methods of public health and nutrition with the aim of advancing knowledge about reproductive and metabolic physiology and improving women's health over the life course. The article reviews recent prenatal supplementation studies and proposes programmatic strategies by which biological anthropologists and public health and nutrition workers may collaborate to define different conditions of prenatal supplement resource allocation and to target more effective interventions.