Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The no solids before 12 months is the Blossom approach:
http://moms.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/18/5839973-meet-the-newest-today-moms-blogger-mayim-bialik
It is not BLW, it is literally no solids for 365 days.
Sorry but I see nothing about "no solids for 365 days" all I see is the girl from the show Blossom telling us about her choices and what worked for her family. Where did you get information about no solids for one entire year?
Straight from the article:
I am here to say that labels mean nothing. And to prove this to you, I am going to tell you about myself; no labels needed. I have been married for seven years to my college sweetheart. We had our first son in 2005, and I nursed him on demand around the clock for 26 months – no pacifiers, no bottles, no solids until 12 months. Son No. 2 was born in 2008 at home, unassisted until pushing. He is still nursing strong and on demand, day and night, at almost 2½.
Yes, as the PP who posted the quote with the links. Blossom was the "some D-list Hollywood star turned crunchy granola mom" that I was referring to.
I agree with the PPs who say that sometime between 4-12 months, as your child shows the various signs that they're ready for solids, that you start them on solids in whatever way works for your family (whether cereal, soft purees, etc). But withholding solids until 12 months has the potential to cause significant problems for your child later in life.
I'd love OP to come back and explain if she's talking about Blossom's approach or baby led weaning.
We're clearly discussing 2 different approaches here.
Why does the OP have to come back to explain? Her post was very clear - she is talking about Blossom and her approach. It is only the defensive BLW people that are talking about BLW.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The no solids before 12 months is the Blossom approach:
http://moms.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/18/5839973-meet-the-newest-today-moms-blogger-mayim-bialik
It is not BLW, it is literally no solids for 365 days.
Sorry but I see nothing about "no solids for 365 days" all I see is the girl from the show Blossom telling us about her choices and what worked for her family. Where did you get information about no solids for one entire year?
Straight from the article:
I am here to say that labels mean nothing. And to prove this to you, I am going to tell you about myself; no labels needed. I have been married for seven years to my college sweetheart. We had our first son in 2005, and I nursed him on demand around the clock for 26 months – no pacifiers, no bottles, no solids until 12 months. Son No. 2 was born in 2008 at home, unassisted until pushing. He is still nursing strong and on demand, day and night, at almost 2½.
Yes, as the PP who posted the quote with the links. Blossom was the "some D-list Hollywood star turned crunchy granola mom" that I was referring to.
I agree with the PPs who say that sometime between 4-12 months, as your child shows the various signs that they're ready for solids, that you start them on solids in whatever way works for your family (whether cereal, soft purees, etc). But withholding solids until 12 months has the potential to cause significant problems for your child later in life.
I'd love OP to come back and explain if she's talking about Blossom's approach or baby led weaning.
We're clearly discussing 2 different approaches here.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The no solids before 12 months is the Blossom approach:
http://moms.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/18/5839973-meet-the-newest-today-moms-blogger-mayim-bialik
It is not BLW, it is literally no solids for 365 days.
Sorry but I see nothing about "no solids for 365 days" all I see is the girl from the show Blossom telling us about her choices and what worked for her family. Where did you get information about no solids for one entire year?
Straight from the article:
I am here to say that labels mean nothing. And to prove this to you, I am going to tell you about myself; no labels needed. I have been married for seven years to my college sweetheart. We had our first son in 2005, and I nursed him on demand around the clock for 26 months – no pacifiers, no bottles, no solids until 12 months. Son No. 2 was born in 2008 at home, unassisted until pushing. He is still nursing strong and on demand, day and night, at almost 2½.
Yes, as the PP who posted the quote with the links. Blossom was the "some D-list Hollywood star turned crunchy granola mom" that I was referring to.
I agree with the PPs who say that sometime between 4-12 months, as your child shows the various signs that they're ready for solids, that you start them on solids in whatever way works for your family (whether cereal, soft purees, etc). But withholding solids until 12 months has the potential to cause significant problems for your child later in life.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The no solids before 12 months is the Blossom approach:
http://moms.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/18/5839973-meet-the-newest-today-moms-blogger-mayim-bialik
It is not BLW, it is literally no solids for 365 days.
Sorry but I see nothing about "no solids for 365 days" all I see is the girl from the show Blossom telling us about her choices and what worked for her family. Where did you get information about no solids for one entire year?
I am here to say that labels mean nothing. And to prove this to you, I am going to tell you about myself; no labels needed. I have been married for seven years to my college sweetheart. We had our first son in 2005, and I nursed him on demand around the clock for 26 months – no pacifiers, no bottles, no solids until 12 months. Son No. 2 was born in 2008 at home, unassisted until pushing. He is still nursing strong and on demand, day and night, at almost 2½.
Anonymous wrote:The no solids before 12 months is the Blossom approach:
http://moms.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/18/5839973-meet-the-newest-today-moms-blogger-mayim-bialik
It is not BLW, it is literally no solids for 365 days.
Anonymous wrote:"The culture where I was raised is centuries old"
What?
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.
agree +100000000
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.
Anonymous wrote: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: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.