And that was exactly my point.

Baby led weaning (the name you guys gave to this common practice) is not about withholding food from the infants, but to introduce regular table food in a friedly manner to them. Nobody is advocating on waiting for a specific date to "introduce" anything. You watch your child's behavior and accommodate to it.

I don't know why PP thought BLW folks are torturing their children waiting 365 days after birth to "introduce" anything to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/starting-solids/AN02145
http://www.center4research.org/2011/08/babies%E2%80%99-eating-habits-and-childhood-obesity/
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.healthychildren.org%2FEnglish%2Fages-stages%2Fbaby%2Ffeeding-nutrition%2FPages%2FSwitching-To-Solid-Foods.aspx&ei=mKBLT4_6KLOPsALJrfHqCA&usg=AFQjCNGuHRemXcI-g4AV1mj4pR4uutPMpA

You know, hospitals, AAP and respected child institutions all say to start solids between 4-6 months, when infants show certain signs. And there are dangers that are associated with children who start solids much later than 6 months. I'm certainly going to take the advice of these institutions over some D-list Hollywood star turned crunchy granola mom.

Some highlights:

With Mayo Clinic emeritus consultant, Jay L. Hoecker, M.D.

Starting solids too late — after age 6 months — poses another set of issues. Waiting too long can:

Slow a baby's growth
Cause iron deficiency in breast-fed babies
Lead to oral motor function delays
Cause an aversion to solid foods[/list]

Postponing solids — including highly allergenic foods — past 4 to 6 months hasn't been shown to prevent asthma, hay fever, eczema or food allergies.

The culture where I was raised is centuries old, too bad you prefer to listen to such sources that have their "studies" paid by the industry that makes you believe that your children need tasteless mush produced in a plant that has little to no regulation. Obviously you can make your own organic baby food but they will either say it's hard and time consuming or they'll try to make you believe you need to buy all the gadgets to get the "perfect texture".

It's not about being crunchy (whatever that means), it's about knowing your child and following their signs. We started late with one child but the other one was grabbing food from my plate at 5 months and we went with him.

And, honestly, giving them rice cereal and watch them choke or spit it out didn't seem like it help with all the allergies your children have been suffering (something almost unheard off where I come from.) I guess it's time to review your concepts...

I'm not the PP you're quoting, but why do you assume people that offer solids around 6 month are offering "tasteless mush"? We didn't. One of ODS first foods was a slice of avocado. Then banana. Then mashed up sweet potato. Oh, and some delicious purrees that I made myself in a blender. The point about these studies is that delaying introduction of solids can have adverse effects. Of course you shouldn't force a child to eat too early (but, really, can you ever FORCE a child to eat?) but if they are willing and eager to take a spoon and pick up food and put it in their mouths, there is no reason to delay. There may actually be compelling reasons NOT to.

You know, in a child's mouth, there are these little hard white things protruding from the gums.

They aren't gum ornaments, they are a sign it is time to introduce solid foods.

Once a child has a few molars it is time for the crunchy stuff. . Perhaps you want to keep breastfeeding "jaws" --go right on, sistah, but solids start when the molars are strong and visible.

Anonymous wrote:"The culture where I was raised is centuries old"

What?

I suspect we have someone who fetishizes the past here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/starting-solids/AN02145
http://www.center4research.org/2011/08/babies%E2%80%99-eating-habits-and-childhood-obesity/
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.healthychildren.org%2FEnglish%2Fages-stages%2Fbaby%2Ffeeding-nutrition%2FPages%2FSwitching-To-Solid-Foods.aspx&ei=mKBLT4_6KLOPsALJrfHqCA&usg=AFQjCNGuHRemXcI-g4AV1mj4pR4uutPMpA

You know, hospitals, AAP and respected child institutions all say to start solids between 4-6 months, when infants show certain signs. And there are dangers that are associated with children who start solids much later than 6 months. I'm certainly going to take the advice of these institutions over some D-list Hollywood star turned crunchy granola mom.

Some highlights:

With Mayo Clinic emeritus consultant, Jay L. Hoecker, M.D.

Starting solids too late — after age 6 months — poses another set of issues. Waiting too long can:

Slow a baby's growth
Cause iron deficiency in breast-fed babies
Lead to oral motor function delays
Cause an aversion to solid foods[/list]

Postponing solids — including highly allergenic foods — past 4 to 6 months hasn't been shown to prevent asthma, hay fever, eczema or food allergies.

The culture where I was raised is centuries old, too bad you prefer to listen to such sources that have their "studies" paid by the industry that makes you believe that your children need tasteless mush produced in a plant that has little to no regulation. Obviously you can make your own organic baby food but they will either say it's hard and time consuming or they'll try to make you believe you need to buy all the gadgets to get the "perfect texture".

It's not about being crunchy (whatever that means), it's about knowing your child and following their signs. We started late with one child but the other one was grabbing food from my plate at 5 months and we went with him.

And, honestly, giving them rice cereal and watch them choke or spit it out didn't seem like it help with all the allergies your children have been suffering (something almost unheard off where I come from.) I guess it's time to review your concepts...

I'm not the PP you're quoting, but why do you assume people that offer solids around 6 month are offering "tasteless mush"? We didn't. One of ODS first foods was a slice of avocado. Then banana. Then mashed up sweet potato. Oh, and some delicious purrees that I made myself in a blender. The point about these studies is that delaying introduction of solids can have adverse effects. Of course you shouldn't force a child to eat too early (but, really, can you ever FORCE a child to eat?) but if they are willing and eager to take a spoon and pick up food and put it in their mouths, there is no reason to delay. There may actually be compelling reasons NOT to.

I have no dog in this fight, but had a laugh remembering my son at 8 months basically GRABBING food out of my hands. Kid would have downed a burrito if he'd had the teeth to gnaw on it. My little one wasn't as intense but they both loved food early on. Don't worry, they got plenty of breast milk and formula too.

I don't think it's a "you must wait until exactly one year to introduce solids" approach. It's more like a "start solids when baby takes an interest, not neccessarily exactly at the 6-month mark." At least, that's how it was for us. We offered solids every once in a while beginning at 7 months or so. They had zero interest - actually, i'd even say they had an aversion, because they would close their mouths and do anything to move their heads away from the spoon. They'd just play with finger foods, and mush them up. We didn't push it, and just offered solids every once in a while, and watched them carefully for any shifts in their behaviors or attitudes toward food. This shift came around 10 months for one DC, and around 11 months for the other. They opened their mouths readily for the spoon, actively reached for our food when we were eating, gnawed on biscuits and cookies instead of playing with them, etc. It was a very clear change. Like I said, the changes happened closer to 1 year, not so close to 6 months.
So I think the point about delayed introduction of solids isn't to wait until the one-year mark before giving your baby one bit of food....it's more about following baby's cues and not forcing the issue -- and when this approach is followed, the true interest in eating seems to begin later than 4 to 6 months -- more like between 9 months and a year, based on my experience and the experiences of other moms in my circle.

"The culture where I was raised is centuries old"

What?

Anonymous wrote:http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/starting-solids/AN02145
http://www.center4research.org/2011/08/babies%E2%80%99-eating-habits-and-childhood-obesity/
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.healthychildren.org%2FEnglish%2Fages-stages%2Fbaby%2Ffeeding-nutrition%2FPages%2FSwitching-To-Solid-Foods.aspx&ei=mKBLT4_6KLOPsALJrfHqCA&usg=AFQjCNGuHRemXcI-g4AV1mj4pR4uutPMpA

You know, hospitals, AAP and respected child institutions all say to start solids between 4-6 months, when infants show certain signs. And there are dangers that are associated with children who start solids much later than 6 months. I'm certainly going to take the advice of these institutions over some D-list Hollywood star turned crunchy granola mom.

Some highlights:

With Mayo Clinic emeritus consultant, Jay L. Hoecker, M.D.

Starting solids too late — after age 6 months — poses another set of issues. Waiting too long can:

Slow a baby's growth
Cause iron deficiency in breast-fed babies
Lead to oral motor function delays
Cause an aversion to solid foods[/list]

Postponing solids — including highly allergenic foods — past 4 to 6 months hasn't been shown to prevent asthma, hay fever, eczema or food allergies.

The culture where I was raised is centuries old, too bad you prefer to listen to such sources that have their "studies" paid by the industry that makes you believe that your children need tasteless mush produced in a plant that has little to no regulation. Obviously you can make your own organic baby food but they will either say it's hard and time consuming or they'll try to make you believe you need to buy all the gadgets to get the "perfect texture".

It's not about being crunchy (whatever that means), it's about knowing your child and following their signs. We started late with one child but the other one was grabbing food from my plate at 5 months and we went with him.

And, honestly, giving them rice cereal and watch them choke or spit it out didn't seem like it help with all the allergies your children have been suffering (something almost unheard off where I come from.) I guess it's time to review your concepts...

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/starting-solids/AN02145
http://www.center4research.org/2011/08/babies%E2%80%99-eating-habits-and-childhood-obesity/
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.healthychildren.org%2FEnglish%2Fages-stages%2Fbaby%2Ffeeding-nutrition%2FPages%2FSwitching-To-Solid-Foods.aspx&ei=mKBLT4_6KLOPsALJrfHqCA&usg=AFQjCNGuHRemXcI-g4AV1mj4pR4uutPMpA

You know, hospitals, AAP and respected child institutions all say to start solids between 4-6 months, when infants show certain signs. And there are dangers that are associated with children who start solids much later than 6 months. I'm certainly going to take the advice of these institutions over some D-list Hollywood star turned crunchy granola mom.

Some highlights:

With Mayo Clinic emeritus consultant, Jay L. Hoecker, M.D.

Starting solids too late — after age 6 months — poses another set of issues. Waiting too long can:

Slow a baby's growth
Cause iron deficiency in breast-fed babies
Lead to oral motor function delays
Cause an aversion to solid foods[/list]

Postponing solids — including highly allergenic foods — past 4 to 6 months hasn't been shown to prevent asthma, hay fever, eczema or food allergies.

Anonymous wrote:The child will let you know when they're ready and it can be at 5mos or at 9.5 mos. Any time between 5 and 12 months is "normal".

The jarred purees industries make you believe you should feed your child that tasteless mush and then the clumpy stuff and then struggle with puffs and chicken nuggets until they're old enough to use utensils.

What OP is talking about is called BABY LED WEANING or BABY LED SOLIDS and you feed the child stuff from your plate as soon as they show interest for what you're eating - the biggest sign they're ready for solids.

Once they're reaching for your plate when you eat, you use a fork to mush up what you're eating or cut it up in small pieces to let them have it on their own. There are wonderful websites where you can learn about it. My child refused purees and I learned about it when doing some research. Our ped was useless so I had to find it on my own.

Could have written your post, OP. Had similar experience with my DC. Wasn't interested in solids until about 10 months. Never wanted purees.

Anonymous wrote:bm or formula alone is not enough to satisfy most babies that long. At 6 months is when solids should be introduced

Not really. The child will let you know when they're ready and it can be at 5mos or at 9.5 mos. Any time between 5 and 12 months is "normal".

The jarred purees industries make you believe you should feed your child that tasteless mush and then the clumpy stuff and then struggle with puffs and chicken nuggets until they're old enough to use utensils.

What OP is talking about is called BABY LED WEANING or BABY LED SOLIDS and you feed the child stuff from your plate as soon as they show interest for what you're eating - the biggest sign they're ready for solids.

Once they're reaching for your plate when you eat, you use a fork to mush up what you're eating or cut it up in small pieces to let them have it on their own. There are wonderful websites where you can learn about it. My child refused purees and I learned about it when doing some research. Our ped was useless so I had to find it on my own.

OP, read about it, it's very interesting and it's amazing to watch our 20mo old eating Indian food... DH feeds her from his plate and I'm in awe every day. I can't for the life of me eat more than a few spoons of his food because it's so spicy and she just LOVES his food. She eats adult sized portions already!

Waiting until one year is taking a risk IMO. There is a study out there somewhere (maybe done in the UK?) about how babies that don't get solids until after 1 year are more at risk for feeding disorders? I don't understand this fad at all. It's true, nutritionally, your child should be getting most of what they need from BM or formula, but they need to develop the skills to eat solid foods during this time. I can't even imagine not letting DS eat food. He's 7 months old and basically gobbles anything you put in front of him. We're doing the baby-led solids thing for the most part and he's just so dang excited to pick up food and try it. Maybe some babies aren't as interested, but I do think it's a matter of just offering until they are. I don't think it's wise NOT to offer.

bm or formula alone is not enough to satisfy most babies that long. At 6 months is when solids should be introduced

The general AAP recommendation is no solids until 6mos and that until 12mos breastmilk or formula should be the primary source of nutrition. Until that time, solid food is seen as more for practice and exposure to different textures and tastes, not as a major source of calories.

Some parents therefore decide for a variety of reasons to wait to introduce. Some kids really push back on having solids and don't show an interest until closer to a year.

I have just recently heard about this -- a few people on this from posted that they were not planning on giving their baby solid until one year and that insane Blossum woman has a parenting blog where she also said her kids had no solids until one year. Is this a new fad? why would someone do this? I am not judging, I am just honestly curious? Is there a movement to not give kids solids until one year?