When Did Your LO Start Eating Table Food? - Page 2

[Oliver'sMom]

Originally Posted by rightkindofme 

Uhm, I'm not sure where y'all are getting the idea that feeding kids early is a recent thing.  My mom was told to put rice cereal in the bottle at 2 *weeks* with my now 42 year old sister.  She says that is what is done with her.  I am pretty darn sure that if anything people are waiting significantly longer recently.  And if you look at historical stuff you often see mentions of brand new babies having regular food mushed up.  The expression I am thinking of is, "A baby can eat whatever his mother eats, it just needs to be softer."

I totally agree.  Waiting until 4-6 months to start solids is a relatively new thing.  It used to be much sooner.  My grandmother fed my mother table food at 2 months old (puree) and also put cereal in her bottle starting at 2 weeks. 

On a side note, my kid's doc has told me that waiting to introduce solids until after 7 months can lead to food sensitivities/allergies...anyone have experience with this or further knowledge on the subject?

[Knitting Mama]

Can't say I've ever heard that-- maybe it's regional?

[happysmileylady]

I voted about 9 months.  That's for table food specifically.  Something my ped said that made a lot of sense to me was that babies don't need table food until they have the teeth to chew it with.  Now, to be clear, he was not saying that was the only readiness sign or even the most important, just that there's no reason to rush to foods, when the little one doesn't even have the physical traits necessary for eating the food. 

With my teenager, she started cereals and purees sometime around 3 months.  I knew nothing about readiness and just followed what my mom suggested.  And, she's fine.  And, looking back she must have been at least a little ready, because I clearly remember feeding her purees at 4 months old and her actually swallowing them.  I don't think she had her first table food though until like 8 or 9 months, it was mashed potatos.

With my 2 year old, I tried around 4 months or so, but she most obviously wasn't ready.  She was pushing not only the puree out, she was pushing the spoon out and turning away.  We tried a few timesbetween 4 and 6 months, but she was closer to 7 months before she actually started any sort of regular puree schedule.  She didn't get her first teeth until 9 or 10 months old and that's when we started table food.  I think her first was actually eggs. 

My youngest is 4 months old and is still on straight breastmilk.  She's very clearly not ready to start, so we don't.  When I see she's ready, we will start purees, and a little later, table foods.

I don't believe in some magic age that makes it better to start foods or not, be it 2 months or 6 months or whatever.  It's when the kid is ready, not a mark on the calendar.

[happysmileylady]

Originally Posted by Oliver'sMom 

Originally Posted by rightkindofme 

Uhm, I'm not sure where y'all are getting the idea that feeding kids early is a recent thing.  My mom was told to put rice cereal in the bottle at 2 *weeks* with my now 42 year old sister.  She says that is what is done with her.  I am pretty darn sure that if anything people are waiting significantly longer recently.  And if you look at historical stuff you often see mentions of brand new babies having regular food mushed up.  The expression I am thinking of is, "A baby can eat whatever his mother eats, it just needs to be softer."

I totally agree.  Waiting until 4-6 months to start solids is a relatively new thing.  It used to be much sooner.  My grandmother fed my mother table food at 2 months old (puree) and also put cereal in her bottle starting at 2 weeks. 

On a side note, my kid's doc has told me that waiting to introduce solids until after 7 months can lead to food sensitivities/allergies...anyone have experience with this or further knowledge on the subject?

My ped never gave an actual number, but he has said that the latest research seems to indicate that waiting to introduce allergenic foods can actually make an allergeric reaction more likely rather than less. 

 

[mom2happy]

If you put food in baby's mouth and they spit it out every time, or push your hand away, or turn their face away, or gag, that baby isn't ready.

I guess we all know when our baby is ready.

I personally think a lot of babies are force fed though.

Diluting something and putting it in a bottle is not natural, nor does the baby even know what's going on.

[sk8boarder15]

Originally Posted by mom2happy 

Diluting something and putting it in a bottle is not natural, nor does the baby even know what's going on.

Very true! I totally agree! 

[sere234]

Originally Posted by mom2happy 

If you put food in baby's mouth and they spit it out every time, or push your hand away, or turn their face away, or gag, that baby isn't ready.

Yeah, that's why I'm wondering about feeding him this early. He seems sooo ready. Keeps everything down, chews/swallows so well, opens his mouth when we bring food near, follows what we're eating closely with his eyes, grabs at it. Though he loves to put just about everything in his mouth right now so it might not mean a thing!!

I just remember trusting my body and what I felt like when I was pregnant. If it seemed like my body needed something, I followed that urge. While in labor, I did what felt right. I follow this trusting your body/instincts with my baby too. If Caden seems like he needs more cuddling, longer sleeping and sucking, more quiet time, I give him that. Seeing him so obviously ready to eat yet reading that many people say not to makes me wonder. Do I follow my baby's cues or what science says? First time mom wonderings!!! Lol!! Thoughts on this dilemma of mine? I'd be interested in what everyone else thinks!

So, we're going to hold off on nearly all food for a couple more weeks, till he's closer to 6 months. Then we'll head back to the world of food for babies head first!