Continue with just mama milk or add some food?

[MamitaM]

My babe is now 4 months old and is healthy and fat. Is it time to start some kind of food or should I wait until he's about 6 months? I've heard you should start at 4 months, but others say 6 months, I'd like to skip the baby cereals b/c I've heard this isn't healthy for them anyway.I'm kinda leaning toward baby led weaning as well to avoid all the work of purees and the cost of jarred food.

[PatioGardener]

most health associations suggest exclusive breastfeeding for the 1st 6 months of life.

here is a great page on starting solids.  http://kellymom.com/nutrition/solids/index.html  i waited until my son showed all the sighs of readiness and was at least 6 months old (he was 7 months, actually.)

Edited by PatioGardener - 1/16/11 at 4:00pm

[Buzzer Beater]

Oh my god I love your freezer!!!!! 

[slgt]

No rush! DD#1 wasn't interested in food until almost 11 months (boy did I love the prolonged calorie sink!). DD#2 at 6 months seems like she would be into food - but I'm waiting until she can sit by herself. Go for BLW, listen to your instincts not what "they" say.

[sosurreal09]

I didn't start solids until 9 m/o! 4 m/o is much too soon, besides mama milk is much more important than solids during the first year. Breast milk has more fat and nutrients than any solid.

[Dmitrizmom]

None of my three were into solids until they were pushing a year.  We skipped purees almost entirely and went straight to table food.  They are pretty universal eaters - not picky at all.  And they are healthy, happy and nicely sized.

[bbrandonsmom]

Hi, if you do some research, you'll find that the infant gut is not developed for solids until 6m+.  Some dr's will try to push that it's okay for solids before then.  

 That said, we didn't intro solids until about 7m, and it didn't go well, so we waited more until 8/9m, and we were ebm. 

[MamitaM]

Originally Posted by Buzzer Beater 

Oh my god I love your freezer!!!!! 

Oh thank you! I'm weird b/c I like to take pictures of my milk before I donate it.

[Knitting Mama]

Mamas like me love milk donors like you!

We waited until Cecilia showed all the readiness signs to offer solids, and we skipped cereals and purees and went straight to soft chunks (avocado was her first food). At 9 months she's finally eating appreciable amounts, so it's been a gradual process, and I wouldn't want it any other way!

[MamitaM]

Yeah I'll do it gradually as well. That way there's not to much for him to get used to or have a bad reaction to. I'm so glad to belong to a nice forum where the mamas don't think it's weird that I don't want to give him food yet or fill his bottle with rice cereal or give him meat.

[Knitting Mama]

Not weird at all! I think that a lot of mamas get pressure from their pediatricians and well-meaning friends (you know, the "Well my kid had rice cereal at 8 weeks old!" crowd). To be 100% honest, I don't expect my ped to have all the up-to-date information on solids. I go to her specifically so she can help me ensure that my daughter's developing on a good curve and that she is physically well. I don't go to her for parenting advice!

[MJB]

There are proven benefits to starting at 4 mos. as well as waiting until 6 mos. It's really up to you, and more importantly, your baby. My sons both started at 6 mos. (one on homemade mashes, one BLW) but my 6 mo. old started at 4 mos. Now that she's 6 months, she's wanting to eat more food at a time and 1-2x a day instead of a little every 1-3 days at 4 months. We've done a mix of homemade purees and table food. 

Five years ago (when my second was born) it seemed like there was no reason to give solids before 6 mos. but new research is showing that starting at 4-6 mos. can reduce the incidence of allergies so it's really not as cut and dry as you might read some places. As an allergic mama, I chose to start earlier this time in hopes that my baby won't have to suffer like I do. 

[stephbrownthinks]

Originally Posted by MJB 

There are proven benefits to starting at 4 mos. as well as waiting until 6 mos. It's really up to you, and more importantly, your baby. My sons both started at 6 mos. (one on homemade mashes, one BLW) but my 6 mo. old started at 4 mos. Now that she's 6 months, she's wanting to eat more food at a time and 1-2x a day instead of a little every 1-3 days at 4 months. We've done a mix of homemade purees and table food. 

Five years ago (when my second was born) it seemed like there was no reason to give solids before 6 mos. but new research is showing that starting at 4-6 mos. can reduce the incidence of allergies so it's really not as cut and dry as you might read some places. As an allergic mama, I chose to start earlier this time in hopes that my baby won't have to suffer like I do. 

MJB, can you link to the research you are referencing? Everything I've read suggests that you should wait until AT LEAST 6 months, and longer if you are trying to prevent allergies.

[Adaline'sMama]

We let my 10 month old have tastes of pretty much whatever we were eating when she was about 4.5 months old. By 5 months she was eating homade mashes, and by 6 months we decided to quit making mashes and let her eat whole fruits and veggies. At 10 months she eats a good solid breakfast and eats less for dinner. She has snacks throughout the day, but she is eating more at one sitting than she used to. Pretty much 90% of her liquid comes from breastmilk. She is still nursing great.

I read through the research posted by MJB in an earlier thread ( a few months ago). It seemed to make a lot of sense to me too. So far we havent seen any food allergies (other than a horrible diaper rash after she ate a persimmon), and she has been eating  legumes, grains, and eggs since she was about 6 months old. We started dairy, nut butters, gluten, and soy in small amounts aftter doing more research.

[germin8]

You'll like this:  http://greenmommyblog.com/index.php/2011/01/10/introducing-solids-to-kamea-not-yet/

I thought the following was interesting:

"Furthermore, our naturopath said to not introduce cereals or grains until at least 9 months of age because a baby lacks the proper enzymes to digest them properly before that."

“According to information in The Breastfeeding Answer Book by Nancy Mahrbacher and Julie Stock, delaying the introduction of food from six months to seven months increases nutrient absorption by 60% for life.”

[bbrandonsmom]

 Is this the link-http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110113213100.htm  There seem to be some missing facts here.   If the mom has crap nutrition, obviously the baby will be lacking.  If mom has good nutrition, baby will not.  Doesn't change the fact, that the gut is not developed and can not handle certain foods.  This will undermine breastfeeding efforts.

[ssh]

We were going to wait until at least 6 months, but at 5.5 months our DD started grabbing food off our plates. She had been sitting alone for a couple of weeks and had the other skills in place (no tongue thrust, picking things up with fingers), so we thought she was ready. We did homemade pureed veggies and fruit, smashed table food and thin slices of fruit. I always thought delayed solids and extended breastfeeding helped prevent allergies.

[MJB]

Originally Posted by stephbrownthinks 

Originally Posted by MJB 

There are proven benefits to starting at 4 mos. as well as waiting until 6 mos. It's really up to you, and more importantly, your baby. My sons both started at 6 mos. (one on homemade mashes, one BLW) but my 6 mo. old started at 4 mos. Now that she's 6 months, she's wanting to eat more food at a time and 1-2x a day instead of a little every 1-3 days at 4 months. We've done a mix of homemade purees and table food. 

Five years ago (when my second was born) it seemed like there was no reason to give solids before 6 mos. but new research is showing that starting at 4-6 mos. can reduce the incidence of allergies so it's really not as cut and dry as you might read some places. As an allergic mama, I chose to start earlier this time in hopes that my baby won't have to suffer like I do. 

MJB, can you link to the research you are referencing? Everything I've read suggests that you should wait until AT LEAST 6 months, and longer if you are trying to prevent allergies.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/121/1/e44?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=1&andorexacttitle=and&andorexacttitleabs=and&fulltext=solid+food&andorexactfulltext=phrase&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/125/1/50

 

Also, from "The Importance of Early Complementary Feeding in the Development of Oral Tolerance" in Pediatric Allergy and Immunology 2008: 19:

"In 2001, the World Health Organisation (WHO) revised its recommendation for exclusive breastfeeding from 4 to 6 months (1). This was based (at least in part) on reduced gastrointesti- nal infectious disease noted in a Belarussian study, and had major implications for disease burden in developing and semi-industrialized countries. At that time, there was also a paucity of evidence regarding the other risks and benefits of introducing complementary foods from 4 vs. 6 months of age (1). These recommendations were aimed at reducing morbidity in developing countries, but may not be appropriate in the growing world population experiencing progres- sive industrialization and escalating risk of immune dysregulation. Similar recommendations have been adopted for the prevention of allergic disease in the USA, the UK, Australia and other industralized countries, based on the theoretical concern for increased gut permeability and immaturity of mucosal immunity in infants. However, there is now mounting concern and some new evidence that this recommendation for delayed introduc- tion of complementary foods may have detri- mental consequences. In Western countries, where these recommendations have been adopted into practice, rates of food allergy have escalated rather than declined in the last 10 yr (3–5)."

 

 

[MJB]

Originally Posted by bbrandonsmom 

 Is this the link-http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110113213100.htm  There seem to be some missing facts here.   If the mom has crap nutrition, obviously the baby will be lacking.  If mom has good nutrition, baby will not.  Doesn't change the fact, that the gut is not developed and can not handle certain foods.  This will undermine breastfeeding efforts.

That is not the case. Breastmilk is not lacking in nutrition just because the mom has "crap" nutrition or even if she is malnourished. It is a known fact that breastmilk doesn't contain enough iron for babies. They are born with great iron stores in most cases that will last them about 6 months. Babies born to mothers who are anemic during pregnancy are no more likely to be iron deficient than those born to mothers who are not anemic during pregnancy. The only way to know your child's iron level is to have it tested. 

From your own link, "there could also be a higher incidence of celiac disease and food allergies if children are not introduced to certain solid foods before six months." 

I posted before *begging* for links about the gut not being developed and being unable to handle certain foods and no one could find anything. The studies I read in Pediatrics and the like don't mention this. I'm pretty sure it's not a reason to delay solids. People on here talk about it all the time but I could not find any legitimate sources explaining this belief. 

Many, many moms have continued to breastfeed for years after the introduction of solids, including myself (twice). Solids in no way replace breastmilk at 4-6 months. A 4 mo. old on solids will eat probably an ounce of food every couple days, or might just gum an apple slice. I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about breastfeeding and have never heard of "early" (4+ month) solids undermining breastfeeding. 

[PatioGardener]

Originally Posted by MJB 

Originally Posted by bbrandonsmom 

 Is this the link-http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/01/110113213100.htm  There seem to be some missing facts here.   If the mom has crap nutrition, obviously the baby will be lacking.  If mom has good nutrition, baby will not.  Doesn't change the fact, that the gut is not developed and can not handle certain foods.  This will undermine breastfeeding efforts.

That is not the case. Breastmilk is not lacking in nutrition just because the mom has "crap" nutrition or even if she is malnourished. It is a known fact that breastmilk doesn't contain enough iron for babies. They are born with great iron stores in most cases that will last them about 6 months. Babies born to mothers who are anemic during pregnancy are no more likely to be iron deficient than those born to mothers who are not anemic during pregnancy. The only way to know your child's iron level is to have it tested. 

Please post a reference to this.  I am under the impression that breastmilk has enough iron for term babies born of healthy moms (no uncontrolled diabetes etc.)  Breastmilk has very little iron, but what it has is highly absorbed until baby starts solids, no?  And that research has shown that exclusive breastfeeding past 6 months does not increase risk of anemia, but early solids introduction could.  So solids should be iron rich. 

Isn't iron deficiency anemia associated with prematurity and early cord clamping?  That's what the latest research that I read showed.

(nak and can't seem to work the quotes thing!)