is 17 weeks too early to start introducing food to baby?

[lucyA1308]

I know that there is so much controversey on this subject, and everyone thinks that their own opinion is the only right way.

i am sure that this is not the case, having spoken to many mums, who have successfully introduced food early, and many mums who have waited until the 6 month target age.

I started introducing purees to my first child at just over 5 months. She loved it, and had been enviously watching us eat our meals for a while. I had thought about starting her early, but had been put off by other new mums, who were certain that I should wait until 6 months.

for a few reasons I would like to start my second child on purees a bit earlier - she will be 17 weeks by the time we are back from holiday, and I thought that would be a good time to start.

Now that I am not such a nervous new mum, i am not put off by others' remarks, but I would be interested to hear about any experiences from people who have started introducing food at around the 4 month age.

Thank you.

Lucy

[sillywoman]

I thought the advice now was it's OK to introduce solids sometime between 4 and 6 months when your child shows signs of being ready?

The main signs being;

1) Watching you as you eat, e.g. following your fork from plate to mouth.

2) Grabbing for food from your plate or hand.

3) The loss of the tongue reflex (whereby if you put a finger/spoon/whatever in their mouth they push it out again with their tongue).

So if your little one is ready - I say go for it. :)

[kristymac1]

I introduced my daughter to solids at 4 months, this was when advice was not to do so until 6 months. I went on what I believed my baby needed at the time - I introduced solids slowly and for a long time her main source of nutrition was milk. Official advice changes all the time, go with your instinct.... x

[Fuschia]

No, the advice is def 6m

http://www.nhs.uk/start4life/pages/no-rush-to-mush.aspx

Notwithstanding some research taking place into optimal introduction of foods to those prone to allergy

There is a correlation i believe between early weaning and increased risk of diabetes and heart disease later in life, though I don't know the mechanism

But re experience of earlier weaning, my first child was weaned at 17w, as was advised in 2003 when he was a baby

I must say it was hard work. Lots of pureeing unless you are ok with jars. Quite time consuming the actual spoon feeding (and needed a reclining sort of high chair because even though he was a very big baby, he was still a bit floppy)

It was all a bit pointless because from 6m he refused ever to countenance another spoonful and we skirmished over finger foods for months (no blw in those days) and he turned out to be the fussiest child on the planet

With the rest of my children, it has been a huge relief to wait to 6m, more pleasurable all round and they are all brilliant eaters

For me though, it was some of the reading I did about early diet and weaning, and adult health, that affected my decisions. The research isn't entirely easy to interpret but my personal response was that waiting was sensible and would certainly do no harm. There is coeliac disease in my family, so I watch the research re optimal time to introduce gluten, with interest. Not seem anything to convince me yet that early is good. My impression was that gluten. Best introduced while still breastfeeding, for sure, if it's a worry.

[sunbob]

With our daughter we introduced a mashed sweet potato or banana supper at 5 mnths because she had been on a growth spurt (constantly demanding breast)for 2 wks which showed no signsof abaiting. She could also sit up and was very keen. With our son now we've been giving him a little something since 4.5 mnths for different reasons. He is practically pulling the food off our plates, he is v strong and can almost sit up, he has no trouble swallowing mashed rather than puree and you can see from his poo that its being digested. That said hubbie and I both have our own opinions on how to look after our children rather than following advice and are prob a bit old fashioned so this approach certainly wouldn't suit everyone. Do your own thing based on what you believe to be best for your children.

[shaunag]

More recent research suggests earlier (from 4 months) weaning may even be better for baby,but the broadly available advice has not yet caught up. A paediatric gastroenterologist told me to follow my babies lead.ultimately as the parent you are the one that knows your baby best.the advice does seem to fluctuate lots though!i tried from 4 months, but lo only really got into food much later on...

[born&brED]

As you can see, Lucy, the advice varies a lot, and yes, everyone goes with what they think is best! You yourself will have the BEST idea as to your baby's specific needs - there may be some tell-tell signs that you simply can't ignore - change in sleeping habits, milk not satisfying, etc etc. And who can tell you not to then?

There is actually more evidence to show that delaying weaning much past 6m is worse than 'early' weaning (i.e. 4-6 months) - see here under the 'when to begin weaning' section. I weaned my first son from 17 weeks, very very slowly, nothing apart from fruit, veg and baby rice til 6m, then more things very gradually. I started weaning my second son at 5.5months, but wish I had a bit earlier - he stopped sleeping well and just wanted to put EVERYTHING into his mouth! His weaning consisted of much more finger food.

By the way, if you were hoping to do (proper) baby-led weaning, I guess you'd let your baby decide when to start weaning - now there's a thought! What if they wanted to at 3-4 months? (My sons were chewing on everything by then!) Would you stop them?!

*edited to say that I didn't replace milk with food! I continue to BF til 12 months, tho obviously reducing the feeds more and more)

[Fuschia]

shaunag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> More recent research suggests earlier (from 4

> months) weaning may even be better for baby,but

> the broadly available advice has not yet caught

> up.

Is that really the case though? There was a letter in the bmj highlighting from the existing body of evidence anything that leant towards 4m, but the new research underway at guys into allergy is a study that has begun to recruit but will run for several years

I researched this very thoroughly just last year, due to my own family history and didn't find anything at all to say 6m was a problem, while 4m is controversial at best

[Fuschia]

This is the latest on the gluten issue

http://www.sacn.gov.uk/pdfs/sacn_cot_statement_timing_of_introduction_of_gluten_into_.pdf

I guess your attitude to these matters will def be affected if you have a potential allergy issue or coeliac disease, or past experience, good or bad, of 4 or 6m, based on the practicalities or any health issues that arose

[Strawbs]

A friend of mine saw a private midwife last week who said the guidelines (and that is all they are!!) are being changed to 17 weeks.. It's a really personal decision and i believe your instinct plays a big part. We weaned Toby early due to his reflux and my gp said so long as I did it slowly and focused on milk based foods ie rice, porridge, fruit and veg mixed with his milk then it would be fine. X

[awilliams123]

I introduced solids, very slowly at 18 weeks....LO loved it all and is lovely 1 year old with a healthy appetite and IS FINE!! Go with your instincts, and just do it slowly and watch carefully for reactions.

[Saffron]

Let your baby lead. A baby that is showing no signs of interest in food probably doesn't have the parallel gut development to be able to process "solids" (ie, anything other than milk). There's no harm in delaying if your baby doesn't appear to be ready. Also starting earlier than 6 months doesn't have to mean offering a buffet. Your baby might initially be interested in just holding a spoon with some yogurt or squishing a bit of banana around in her fist. xx

[MichelleT]

Google open gut, and follow your baby's lead. Baby rice and cereal is nutritionally worthless. We waited til 6 months and fed him real food from the word go.

[Fuschia]

Bit shocked by this, actually

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2125332/Shop-bought-baby-foods-lack-vital-nutrients-essential-growth-protection-illness.html

Obviously weaning early may be on to home made food, but the advertising of shop bought food as suitable for 4-6m is all the more unfortunate if it's the case that the solids displacing milk at a key stage of infant development is so lacking in key nutrients

[Saffron]

It's awful, but it's hardly surprsing. Most of the shop bought stuff is just over-processed food aimed at babies. It's no wonder that it's low in nutritional value. The shocker is the advertising. Also, the assumption (not saying anyone here is assuming this!) that babies can't eat whole unprocessed foods is quite unfortunate.

I thought is was tough having a winter baby -- Jan birthday, didn't hardly leave the house for snow! But when it came to weaning, it was brilliant when all the summer fruits and veg were in season. xx

[Fuschia]

I think we all buy into the idea that after 6m 'milk isn't enough' and that iron stores are depleting ... Which is fine, but commercial baby food is clearly not the place to find it