A thought on introducing solids...

[LouisaC]

Ok, so my 4mth DS is growing quick and is doing things that, when I look around the Dr's waiting room, he is obviously miles ahead of some other 4mos, he's sitting and supporting his head with very little support, he is holding his own weight for extended periods of time when he stands (sometimes he won't sit down however much I try to coax him to), he babbles and holds conversations with me in his own little language and even the HV has said that he is miles ahead.

So why, when I tell her that I have introduced baby rice into his routine (I know that NHS guidelines say 6mth) and explain to her that he is interested in food, he constantly puts things into his mouth (and often tries to pull the spoon off me to 'speed' things up), he can swallow without any concern of coughing or choking and that I genuinely think that he is ready for it, does she go absolutely crazy?

Apparently if I give him baby rice (even once a day) I am putting him at risk of allergies??? She then goes on to tell me that the number of children allergic to certain food has risen in recent decades and the culprit is unquestionably the fact that the children with allergies have been weaned early - just to make a point here, but I'm not weaning him, I'm just introducing a new texture to his food - It's not like I'm blending peanuts and shoving them down his throat!

And has anyone actually looked at any other factors for these allergies in the younger generations? To my mind, babies have been introduced to solids for decades - my gran started my mother on baby rice at 3mths back in the sixties and it was commonplace well before then - what could possibly have changed to make children so at risk of developing allergies now that didn't cause allergies in children back then? - it couldn't possibly be that children don't seem to go outside anymore, it wouldn't be that children now seem to eat a large quantity of convenience food or at an even wider push - it couldn't possibly be that allergies are now recorded much better in the NHS? - so apparently there has been an increase when in fact there has not.

I hate the fact that whilst children may develop and reach certain milestones at different times, they can't start to enjoy new experiences until a certain age because of something that just doesn't seem to make sense and because someone in the NHS has said that it is just a blanket 'wrong' - who needs the Daily Mail with logic like that?

I know its a rant, but I don't think that I should be made to ignore every maternal instinct in my body and be have someone try to make me feel guilty for giving my son a bit of baby rice (aka a thicker baby milk formula) because of a guideline that will undoubtedly be changed in a few years time.

P.S. Before there's any misunderstanding - I'm not having a go at parents with allergies or saying that they don't get good food or enough exercise - some children will have allergies and it cannot be avoided - I'm saying about society on a much larger level because that was the argument the HV gave me - 'that in society, the number of children with allergies has risen'

 

[Button#]

It's down to scientific research showing that babies weaned early are more at risk of allergies and digestive problems in later life due to early weaning. The gut is not mature enough until about the six month mark to handle food other than milk. Rice cereal isn't just another texture it's adding different proteins and has a different make up to milk.

It's fine to do what you want with regards to your child but don't blame a health proffessional who has been told to pass on scietifically back research for the good of your child. Mother's intuition isn't able to see if the gut is fully developed. What has changed is we know more now than what we used to.

 

[Megmog]

When I had my babies 4 month check up (a few days before he turned 4 months) the health visitor said that my LO would be needing solids within a couple of weeks. He's always been big although I'm not sure whether that has anything to do with it. I started solids about a week later. She also said that the 6 month thing is a bit of an experiment, as over the last ten years there has been an increase in allergies so they have to now say six months although they won't know the results or whether it makes a difference for another ten years. She is quite young as I know some offer outdated advice.
Not wanting to start any arguement I'm simply repeating what she had said. I don't usually tend to comment when it will probably become a debate but I just think its odd how the advice is so conflicting.
Im my opinion I think that it is completely up to the parents and whatever they feel is best for their child. So as far as I'm concerned, you do whatever you feel would benefit your LO the most and what you are comfortable with, he is your baby

 

[lhancock90]

Its nothing to do with holding heads up etc.
Its about the internal body being ready. Your HV is just trying to offer you the safest advice for your LO.
6 months is the best time, 4 months is okay.
Also babyrice is just empty calories. You'd be better off with things like vegetable purees or fruit. BLW is fantastic.

 

[minties]

Your baby sounds absolutely normal development wise. Advanced physical movements don't equal advanced bowels though anyway. An advanced 12 year old with big boobs wouldn't be encouraged to have sex or beer early, right? As we don't think it's good for them.

 

[Sparrow85]

The reason is because, no matter how advanced you think your baby is, their digestive system isn't really ready until 6 months. 4 months did used to be the guideline age, however research is developing all the time. Just because they did it decades ago, doesn't make it alright. Think of all the things they used to do hers ago that you just wouldn't do now.

Allergies is very, very real and if you do decide to wean now, do not give any dairy before 6 months.

Also, I just don't understand why you would want to wean now? Honestly, these days are so easy just giving milk. It's so much more hassle when they eat solids. My LO is only on 2 bottles per day now, but god, I'm so much busier as he wants something to eat every hour, even if it's just a snack. Just enjoy this time and don't start too early.

Baby rice has no nutritional value either, so it's kind of pointless and very bland. Wait a little while and then you can introduce him to pretty much anything you want.

Of course, it's your baby and your decision. Your HV is only doing her job though

 

[LouisaC]

My point is that NHS and therefore their advice changes all the time (though they wouldn't say as much to our face), my little man is doing very well on the baby rice and has not experienced any problems with it at all. I'm sick of being told what is best for my baby by people who do not know him and are just spouting government guidelines at me - if that was what was needed, surely a government robot could reel off a recording of NHS guidelines?

Lies, damn lies and statistics - This is precisely the reason that we now can't eat broccoli/use toothpaste/drink water for risk of this, that and the other. If it is indeed introducing solids early which causes allergies - why is it that numbers have increased due early introduction of food despite early introduction having been the norm for so long? - What will they ever find in 20years time when our children have grown? What will problems will late introduction have caused? - Daily Mail at the ready...

I have not been irresponsible in introducing my little man to baby rice - and after a debate on this point with a fully qualified dietition - it was conceded that I had a point and and that it did indeed 'sound' like he was ready to move on, but of course, it wasn't worth her job to say that he was.

Everyone is so quick to say that every baby is different when it comes to rolling over, sitting, walking and talking, why not being ready for solids? We shouldn't be made to feel as though we are harming our children when the fact of the matter is that no one knows precisely what the future will show and what may be 'harmful' then that isn't now, but they are never willing to admit this

 

[felix555]

What's the rush? Genuine question ...

 

[lhancock90]

My point is that NHS and therefore their advice changes all the time (though they wouldn't say as much to our face), my little man is doing very well on the baby rice and has not experienced any problems with it at all. I'm sick of being told what is best for my baby by people who do not know him and are just spouting government guidelines at me - if that was what was needed, surely a government robot could reel off a recording of NHS guidelines?

Lies, damn lies and statistics - This is precisely the reason that we now can't eat broccoli/use toothpaste/drink water for risk of this, that and the other. If it is indeed introducing solids early which causes allergies - why is it that numbers have increased due early introduction of food despite early introduction having been the norm for so long? - What will they ever find in 20years time when our children have grown? What will problems will late introduction have caused? - Daily Mail at the ready...

I have not been irresponsible in introducing my little man to baby rice - and after a debate on this point with a fully qualified dietition - it was conceded that I had a point and and that it did indeed 'sound' like he was ready to move on, but of course, it wasn't worth her job to say that he was.

Everyone is so quick to say that every baby is different when it comes to rolling over, sitting, walking and talking, why not being ready for solids? We shouldn't be made to feel as though we are harming our children when the fact of the matter is that no one knows precisely what the future will show and what may be 'harmful' then that isn't now, but they are never willing to admit this

Which why you don't have to start at 6 months you can start a little earlier or later,
If you had cancer and a doctor told you to have chemo you wouldn't argue so why distrust that doctors understand whats best for your child healthwise?
Mothers don't know everything, you can't see inside your babys tiny underdeveloped stomach and see if its ready.
It really really annoys me that people trust their doctors on EVERYTHING except when it comes to a baby and healthy guidelines.
If you don't trust the NHS, don't use it.

 

[staralfur]

I think the point is that you have no way of knowing if your baby's digestive system is mature enough. Assuming that it is because he's early with other stuff is just that - assuming. Since there's no way of actually knowing, 6 months is advised.

I'm not really sure why you're so uppity about it. A health visitor/nurse/whoever following guidelines is surely not a bad thing.

The recommendations are based on a bunch of research that's been analyzed and sifted through by people undoubtedly more trained to do so than you or I. I never understood why "well the guidelines are always changing so why bother following them?" was a logical perspective to some people. The guidelines change because people are always searching for more vital information. The guidelines in place now are there because they're the most accurate and safe as far as we know right now. I don't think you can really expect anything more than that.

 

[Button#]

Of course their advice changes. Research is ongoing, they don't just say well there's the guidelines we're going to set them in stone no matter what we discover. Guidelines used to say putting babies to sleep on their backs was dangerous until they discovered that babies sleeping on their fronts increased the risk of SIDS. Would you rather they didn't change the guidelines to save the lives of babies just because they had decided in the old days that the more dangerous way was right?

 

[laodicean]

Actually, the evidence isn't strong either way, and there's quite a big study going on right now that's looking into it further, as rates of allergy have increased as length of time taken to wean has increased, thus suggesting that waiting to wean is increasing food allergies.

https://www.eatstudy.co.uk

My friend's little girl has been enrolled onto it, and she was randomised to the group that started foods at 12wks, along with continued breast feeding. Hasn't done her any harm yet, but obviously anecdote doesn't equal data, and I'm looking forward to seeing the results of the study once its completed.

As for weaning - if you think he's ready then go for it. It annoys the heck out of me when everyone on here tells you to follow your Mummy instincts (even if the medical professionals are telling you different) in one post, and then in the next beat you around the head that you're a terrible mother because you're not following the latest fad. Because these "Must Do" rules of parenthood come and go; ten years ago the weight of popular opinion on here would be that you were some kind of monster if you gave your child the MMR. Weaning seems to be a popular one around here, and I've noticed people who have proudly answered in one thread that they didn't start weaning till 6mths, and in another have admitted they started at 4mths.

I started at 5mths and 1 wk. He was sitting unsupported, grabbing food off my plate and off my fork, and happily chewing away at anything he put in his mouth. He's already dairy and soy allergic since birth, so I really don't think "early" weaning is going to damage him any further - if anything, I want to find out about any other allergies sooner rather than later.

So ultimately, do what you think is best as long as its sensible. Is your child older than 17wks, able to swallow without choking, and eager and curious about food? If yes, you may want to start weaning. Or not. Waiting till 26wks is an equally valid weaning choice. It's up to you!

 

[HoneyBee144]

I'm completely behind the idea that mums know their babies best, they absolutely do no question about it however unless you are a trained healthcare professional you do not know the science and research behind the guidelines. The guidelines are just that: guidelines you do not have to follow them but based on research they are there to advice what is judged to be safe and in your child's best interest. I work in the research and effectiveness department for the NHS and to be honest it bothers me when people just pick and choose which guidelines they agree with. These guidelines weren't pulled out of thin air they were the result of years of studies and research conducted by trained professionals who studied and worked hard. They change so often because new research is being done all the time and new developments are being made.

If you want to start your baby on solids now you have every right to but please do not undermine(sp?!) all the hard work which goes into developing those guidelines.

 

[jd83]

Honestly, I just don't get why ANYONE is in a rush to introduce solids, regardless of whatever the guidelines suggest. Weaning is a total PAIN! Its way more work, especially when you really get into it. ITs not cutesy, its a PAIN. Bottles and breastfeeding are justso much easier that I cannot for the life of me fathom why people are in such a rush to make more work for themselves. Babies need mainly milk the first year.

ETA: I understand there are plenty moms who may feel their decisions are justified, and that's fine, but I really don't feel like its okay to just decide that because you chose to do things differently that means the guidelines are wrong. It doesn't make them wrong. They were made by years of research and many studies. Yes, you are free to follow them or ignore them, but I don't get the whole rant because you feel they are wrong.

 

[minties]

My point is that NHS and therefore their advice changes all the time (though they wouldn't say as much to our face), my little man is doing very well on the baby rice and has not experienced any problems with it at all. I'm sick of being told what is best for my baby by people who do not know him and are just spouting government guidelines at me - if that was what was needed, surely a government robot could reel off a recording of NHS guidelines?

Lies, damn lies and statistics - This is precisely the reason that we now can't eat broccoli/use toothpaste/drink water for risk of this, that and the other. If it is indeed introducing solids early which causes allergies - why is it that numbers have increased due early introduction of food despite early introduction having been the norm for so long? - What will they ever find in 20years time when our children have grown? What will problems will late introduction have caused? - Daily Mail at the ready...

I have not been irresponsible in introducing my little man to baby rice - and after a debate on this point with a fully qualified dietition - it was conceded that I had a point and and that it did indeed 'sound' like he was ready to move on, but of course, it wasn't worth her job to say that he was.

Everyone is so quick to say that every baby is different when it comes to rolling over, sitting, walking and talking, why not being ready for solids? We shouldn't be made to feel as though we are harming our children when the fact of the matter is that no one knows precisely what the future will show and what may be 'harmful' then that isn't now, but they are never willing to admit this

My well child book (we have an NHS and 'health visitors' here) says that babies do best on milk until 5 months, and I am 31. My mum's health visitor even wrote in the book "closer to 6 months when baby is better able to sit and feed themselves". And hey...it even has a blurb about breastfeeding being the best thing to do for baby, and it was noted that mum breastfed on demand, a term people seem to only associate with modern times.

 

[wemustntpanic]

I'm with you op, I just don't understand this whole allergy argument. As children it is almost guaranteed that we were all weaned at 4 months (or even earlier!) and my guess is that very few of us have allergies. Some people will have and some won't, I know I am disregarding several studies and am sure someone can post a helpful link as to prove me wrong but... I don't think giving a pureed carrot or two is going to be detrimental to my lo.
And as for why the rush? Because he was hungry...

 

[laodicean]

however unless you are a trained healthcare professional you do not know the science and research behind the guidelines.

Fortunately for me and my sanity, I am. However, this is the internet: I have no way of proving this to you and no wish to neither. What I will say is this: guidelines are only a guide. Not a rule or a law; a guide.

I know the science and research behind the WHO guidelines, and I approve of the principle of them, I just can't apply all of their logic to my situation. YMMV.

If you want to start your baby on solids now you have every right to but please do not undermine(sp?!) all the hard work which goes into developing those guidelines.

Questioning guidelines does not undermine the hard work put into them; I've written guidelines and I'm the first person to break them if the situation goes outside of generalisations. In fact, if no one ever questioned guidelines then they'd never be reviewed and re-written.

 

[Tess.ie]

I understand there are plenty moms who may feel their decisions are justified, and that's fine, but I really don't feel like its okay to just decide that because you chose to do things differently that means the guidelines are wrong. It doesn't make them wrong. They were made by years of research and many studies. Yes, you are free to follow them or ignore them, but I don't get the whole rant because you feel they are wrong.

My feelings exactly!

 

[minties]

I'm with you op, I just don't understand this whole allergy argument. As children it is almost guaranteed that we were all weaned at 4 months (or even earlier!) and my guess is that very few of us have allergies. Some people will have and some won't, I know I am disregarding several studies and am sure someone can post a helpful link as to prove me wrong but... I don't think giving a pureed carrot or two is going to be detrimental to my lo.
And as for why the rush? Because he was hungry...

I have allergies, as does my OH (hayfever, milk intollerances), my mum has eczema and asthma, my uncle has hayfever and IBS.

 

[staralfur]

Yeah... I think something like 1 in 4 people have allergies... not my personal definition of "very few".