Thoughts on solids at 4 months?

[Samiam03]

I don't want a debate...just saying that upfront.

Well I am big on following readiness signs with everything in my kids' lives...and I always read how solids before 6 months aren't good. We started my son a week before he turned 6 months because he was showing readiness signs. Well my daughter JUST turned 4 months and she is showing signs. She fusses when we are eating, she watches us eat and opens her mouth, she shows an interest in the food. Well today I decided to humor myself and her and gave her a tiny "one time" taste of our food. Well she wanted more and started screaming and throwing a fit when we didn't give it to her. Now I'm left with the question if I should start her on solids this early or not. I know doctors say yes but I can't get the "experts" out of my head.

 

[mellyboo]

Jordyn is almost 4 months and and she follows the fork with food I tried her the other day I kept movin the food around and and was following .. Will be starting solids at about 5 months we are going through 2 cans of formula a week!

 

[readytotry]

I'm with the "experts" on this one - none of the things you have said are considered signs for weaning in the uk.
Here the advice is that babies are ready to be weaned when they have lost the tongue thrust reflex (don't spit most of it straight back out) and can sit pretty much unsupported. However, even if you think Lo is showing these signs, there is still no evidence of harm from waiting til 6months, so why hurry.

But I appreciate the advice in the us is different.

 

[chelseav1213]

Lo is doing the same thing but I'm not sure if hes really ready.. I wish I could just give him regular food but I know its better to wait :/ FIL decided to give babya tiny taste of pudding whip cream mix though! I was a little upset. But mainly because it was when I was in the shower and didn't see it because everyone said he loved it. Also because he shouldn't have done it without asking since its so much sugar but I did want to say I remember u from diabetic thread right? That's one of the main reasons om waiting as long as I can with him because the extra sugar in food & how he could develop both types easier if hes weaned earlier but honestly no matter what anyone says you are mom and you know your baby better than any experts or doctors anywhere u know when shes ready

 

[baby287]

I would still wait, if its not going to benefit lo then theres no point in starting early. My lo follows my fork and food but he also follows my phone and anything else I'm holding lol it is tempting though. I'm excited for that stage!

 

[Larkspur]

Agree w PP, unless its medically prescribed (rather than just okayed), it seems like there are no benefits only risks to starting early. I have two friends who started at 4.5 months, now both having problems w constipation and food rejection and wish they waited.

 

[gaiagirl]

I feel like it's on a continuum and every baby is different, just like every other developmental milestone. What happens overnight from 5 months, 29 days to 6 months?! Something magical? Lol.

My point is just that I'm sure some babies are ready earlier and some later. There are certain foods that are considered binders though, like starchy rice cereal and bananas I think, so I would be careful which foods you use before 6 months...

Also a baby that young would likely not actually ingest much of the food you put in front of them, but rather just experiment and play with it which I personally think is all a part of learning to eat. If you are shovelling it in their mouth and they're not ready maybe that's another story...

I don't know, I'm no expert but I plan to follow my LOs cues and let him experiment likely before 6 months if he is interested!

 

[Larkspur]

I don't think anyone is naive enough to think there's a magical change at six months, nor that some babies are not capable of eating without face planting in their food earlier. The cautions seem to be about allergies and digestive issues, which you can't really know about unless you have a microscope and a gut sample. Six months is the age at which digestive systems have generally matured enough to reduce risk. I don't think that's correlated to whether babies can sit and show interest in food.

 

[Casey3]

I second what readytotry has said

It's not that they magically change at EXACTLY 6 months.. yes all babies develop a little different but it is around the age of 6 months that they are developmentally and physically ready. What the OP has described are not signs of readiness.. the only TRUE signs are the loss of the tongue thrust reflex and the ability to sit unaided. Not every baby does these two things bang on six months, some do it a week or two earlier and some do it a month later.. they all vary but it generally happens around 6 months... never as early as 4 though. Readiness coincides with when they are ready internally so yes, we chose to wait (he sat unaided at 25 weeks so we started at the recommended 26 weeks when I truly felt he was indeed ready!) Also if one plans on BLW then you have to wait til they can sit well as too much slumping would be a choking hazard.

Starting at 5 months though we did included him at the dinner table in the high chair.. he just got to play with cups and spoons.

Good luck with your decision!

 

[C_baby]

This is one area I see no benefit in ignoring the current research and advice. If knowing what I know I weaned early, and baby went on to develop a digestive problem such as IBS I would forever kick myself wondering if I'd caused it. To me unless it's medically indicated (ie severe reflux) It's not worth the risk.

Besides there's plenty of time to clean food out of his ears/the carpet/the high chair later on.

 

[gaiagirl]

For the record I didn't mean as early as 4 months I was just talking about variation of a few weeks!

I have read research that supports more flexibility than the 6 month marker too, I don't think the consensus is that any earlier leads to digestive issues....

 

[greenpear]

4 months is considered "safe" zone but 6 months is the preferred time frame to start baby on solids because physiologically they are more ready to eat real food. I waited till 6 months and naively thought that I would start feeding LO one day and she'll just gobble things up haha...NOT. She's almost 7 months old now and won't eat more than a teaspoon full of stuff and while she loves playing with finger foods most of them end up down her pants and not in her stomach. I don't think she would even do that at 4 months so I'm glad that I waited till now. My only hope is that she'll start eating more properly by the time she's 1 and and has to go to daycare.

 

[special_kala]

I don't see how a 4 month old could handle solids, a baby will watch you drink bleach doesn't mean they want it.

Babies have no concept of food so they don't want to eat what you have. They are just watching you, like they watch you do everything.

To me solids is proper food which babies arnt ready for until much closer to 6 months. I've never understood why purees etc are referred to as solids.

 

[bumpy_j]

I fully trust the research undercarried and therefore am completely against weaning before 6 months unless for a valid medical reason. Like a PP said, give or take a couple of weeks because it is an approximate mark.

 

[HopefulMi]

A Lot of people are against 4 months yet just a few years back, HV were telling you 4 months and I bet the same people would have said 4 months is fine. Most paeds say 4 months is fine (bit more educated than a HV IMO) and a lot of the literature and studies that suggested 6 months were done in underdeveloped countries where food hygience and sterilising doesn't go on. I'm not saying it's right or wrong. My son is ready at almost 5 months,not 4 but if you want to follow the research, you should maybe fully read around it.

People are quick to say 'oh I would NEVER do that' but as early as the early noughties, you would have done because HV would have suggested it. They HAVE to follow guidelines.

Also, my son had is on due to big centile drop and won't take milk. HV doesn't know but GP does.

 

[HopefulMi]

4 months is considered "safe" zone but 6 months is the preferred time frame to start baby on solids because physiologically they are more ready to eat real food. I waited till 6 months and naively thought that I would start feeding LO one day and she'll just gobble things up haha...NOT. She's almost 7 months old now and won't eat more than a teaspoon full of stuff and while she loves playing with finger foods most of them end up down her pants and not in her stomach. I don't think she would even do that at 4 months so I'm glad that I waited till now. My only hope is that she'll start eating more properly by the time she's 1 and and has to go to daycare.

As far as people trusting research goes, research also shows that a baby who has been given bland first foods in small quantities before 6 months will take solids better and try more foods so your LO still might not be ready or this might have been avoided. I think you are right for doing what YOU wanted to do but just playing devil's advocate and saying, people who throw research in other people's face should check ALL available research (I'm a science student with potential of going into WHO line of work so be careful with their research when it is mostly centred round developing countries with different needs to ours)

 

[patch2006uk]

4 months is considered "safe" zone but 6 months is the preferred time frame to start baby on solids because physiologically they are more ready to eat real food. I waited till 6 months and naively thought that I would start feeding LO one day and she'll just gobble things up haha...NOT. She's almost 7 months old now and won't eat more than a teaspoon full of stuff and while she loves playing with finger foods most of them end up down her pants and not in her stomach. I don't think she would even do that at 4 months so I'm glad that I waited till now. My only hope is that she'll start eating more properly by the time she's 1 and and has to go to daycare.

As far as people trusting research goes, research also shows that a baby who has been given bland first foods in small quantities before 6 months will take solids better and try more foods so your LO still might not be ready or this might have been avoided. I think you are right for doing what YOU wanted to do but just playing devil's advocate and saying, people who throw research in other people's face should check ALL available research (I'm a science student with potential of going into WHO line of work so be careful with their research when it is mostly centred round developing countries with different needs to ours)

The research suggesting babies accepted more 'tastes' if weaned earlier than 6 months was carried out using purée. I'd argue that invalidates it, as who's to say the babies aren't rejecting the spoon rather than the food? We were actually asked to be part of a 'tastes acceptance' study as DS was eligible having been BF until 6 months, but I declined as it all had to be puréed and spoon fed.

The research on which the weaning guidelines are based was not carried out in developing countries, and isn't only applicable there. It absolutely accounts for local hygiene standards. It's all quite clear if you read the actual studies and guidelines

 

[patch2006uk]

A Lot of people are against 4 months yet just a few years back, HV were telling you 4 months and I bet the same people would have said 4 months is fine. Most paeds say 4 months is fine (bit more educated than a HV IMO) and a lot of the literature and studies that suggested 6 months were done in underdeveloped countries where food hygience and sterilising doesn't go on. I'm not saying it's right or wrong. My son is ready at almost 5 months,not 4 but if you want to follow the research, you should maybe fully read around it.

People are quick to say 'oh I would NEVER do that' but as early as the early noughties, you would have done because HV would have suggested it. They HAVE to follow guidelines.

Also, my son had is on due to big centile drop and won't take milk. HV doesn't know but GP does.

In the early 20th century, they'd have been telling you to wean onto 'pap' (flour water) at a few weeks old, mid 20th century, condensed milk by 8-10 weeks. In the middle ages you'd have been up to your ankles in excrement with a bag of herbs to ward off the 'bad air'. Knowledge and advice change.

 

[summer rain]

4 months is considered "safe" zone but 6 months is the preferred time frame to start baby on solids because physiologically they are more ready to eat real food. I waited till 6 months and naively thought that I would start feeding LO one day and she'll just gobble things up haha...NOT. She's almost 7 months old now and won't eat more than a teaspoon full of stuff and while she loves playing with finger foods most of them end up down her pants and not in her stomach. I don't think she would even do that at 4 months so I'm glad that I waited till now. My only hope is that she'll start eating more properly by the time she's 1 and and has to go to daycare.

As far as people trusting research goes, research also shows that a baby who has been given bland first foods in small quantities before 6 months will take solids better and try more foods so your LO still might not be ready or this might have been avoided. I think you are right for doing what YOU wanted to do but just playing devil's advocate and saying, people who throw research in other people's face should check ALL available research (I'm a science student with potential of going into WHO line of work so be careful with their research when it is mostly centred round developing countries with different needs to ours)

I'm sorry but with all due respect, you're incorrect about the research used to decide the 6 month guideline by the WHO, though this is a very common myth. in fact the majority of the studies they used in 2001 (60-70%) were from developed countries, not developing ones. Since then even more research has been undertaken in developed countries that reinforces the earlier findings. Another thing is when the UK government originally changed the guideline to 4 months in 1996, they stated clearly that it was 4-6 months but parents interpreted it to mean between 3 and 4 months and that starting any later than 4 months could be harmful. Most paediatricians aren't that well versed or trained on infant nutrition, this is why they have specialist dieticians, also like health visitors most paediatricians get their supposedly up to date training from seminars run by baby food and formula companies, whose sole aim at the end of the day is to shift more products xx

 

[overcomer79]

Without getting into a debate, my son was ready at 4 months. My daugher was more like 5.5months. Good luck with what you decide.