I was just reading another thread where someone said that they knew of mums who give their babies solids before 6 months (2 or 3 months) of age to get their babies to sleep all night.

I didn't think this was very common but I've been hearing it more and more lately and it's got me shocked.

I know it's only a 'recommendation' not to give your baby solids before 6 months but it's also only a 'recommendation' not to give your baby coffee, nicotine, & alcohol or to take them outside without sunscreen & a hat and surely noone does that either!

Why would people do that to their babys, just so that they *the parents* can get a good nights sleep? Dont' people want whats best for their baby?

You are seriously comparing starting solids before 6 months to giving babies alcohol??



There are arguments for and against. Not so long ago it was recommended to start at 4 months and that by 6 months babies be eating meat.

Educate yourself before putting others down.

I have often wondered the same thing. I do understand that in some instances it may be recommended to start solids early (from advice from GP etc) however when mothers start giving their children solids early to gate them to sleep for longer is just wrong and selfish. The right thing to do would be to wait until your childrens digestive tract is maturly ready to handle solid foods.

I have a friend who has a son who is now 9 months old. Her son weighs more than my DD who is 18 months old (he weighs 12kg). She started him on solid foods at around 6 weeks. By this I don't mean a bit of farex but fully on 3 meals a day solid foods. She also used to go through about a jar or 2 of honey a fortnight to put on his dummy.

To me this just screams wrong on so many levels.

Liz

I think it has to be taken on a case by case basis (solids, not alcohol! ). Was having this very conversation with a friend yesterday as we have started DS on solids a little early. Not so we get to sleep at night, but because we think he is ready for it and needs it.
He is starting to crawl so using up heaps of energy, I doubt my milk (which isn't always plentiful) can give him enough nourishment to cater for this.
My friend said to follow our instinct. She was told to wait till her bub was 6 months. They did. They later found out she was very anaemic as a result. That is hardly good for bub,is it?? And it would not have happened had they put her on solids earlier.
Besides, every decade there seems to be a new trend as to when to start solids. Ranging from 6 weeks, to 9 months. Doesn't seem very scientific, does it?

I can see this thread de-railing very very quickly

Annixx

It's like a train wreck - you can see it coming but you just can't look away!

The world health organisation currently recommends 6 months of age. For DD1 born 1994 it was 4.5mths but I didn't start till 6 months, DD2 was 5 months in 1998 but like 1/2 tspn of food per day for ages, DD3 was a different kettle of fish she showed no interest in food until 7 months. All of my children were fully breast fed and gained weight quickly always in the 75+ percentile.

I don't understand feeding solids at 2-3 months but I don't have any concerns over 5 months, nearing the 6 month mark.

Individual choice I guess, like all parenting decisions. Us onlookers just have to be silent in our observations

I will be Honest with you my son was on solids once a day from 6 weeks of age because he would not sleep as he was hungry ALL THe TIME and it has done nothing to him. He was 4kg at birth and now at 5 he is only 19kg. on the other end of the scale i have a 2 year old DD weighed 3.6kg at birth who started solids at 5 months has just lost abit of weight and now weighs 20.5kg she was 22kg she hardly eats anything. so it does not mean feeding a child early increases there weight.

I started to feed my son after talking it over with my Husband and my Dr and it was the best i could have done for him.

People do thing for diffrent reasons and they may not be the same for eveyone but we all do what WE AS PARENTS feel is best for our own kids. And its not up to anyone except ourself's to say what is best for our own kids.

I will not post here again in this topic as i have said my bit.

I hope this was a typo

Just to clarify - I mean giving solids to get the baby to sleep through the night. i didn't mean giving solids for medical reasons!

I think it also has a lot to do with education. I am not saying it is an excuse, as everyone has the choice to make sure they are up to date with the latest recommendations - however for many new parents, their only source of advice is from their own mothers, who are passing on what they did with their children (often 25yrs+ ago), and in many cases this included feeding solids at an early age.
MCHN also vary widely in their recommendations, so they are also not necessarily the best to gain advice from.

But how do you know that it wouldn't have happened had they put her on solids earlier?

I also don't understand how your friend said to follow your instinct. I see from your sig that you have only the one child who is about 4 months old? No offense but this hardly makes you an expert in the field of pediatricts. perhaps you should look into getting a professional opinion.

I also see this thread de-railing however what frustrates me is when people say "I know my child better than anyone" that is a pathetic thing to say, unless you are qualified in the area how would you know whether or not your child needs solids earlier. easy solution would be to just feed more frequently.



Yes it was a typo. Opps.


See IMO that is a silly comment. My DD is 19 months old and personally I am sure there are people out there who would know what is best for my child more so than me. People who have spent many many years studying and doing research. Being a mother for 19 months in no way makes me an expert.

My child health nurse told me that solids should not be started before 6 months as babies stomachs are not ready for it. She said although there is baby food in the supermarket that says 4months it has to say 'From' 4months or 4+ months. That way the manufacturer has covered their butts.

But on the other hand...my mum started me on solids from about 3 months (as it was the done thing in Ireland back then) and i had no dramas!

Lisa

I asked my paediatrician about this because my kids spanned the change in WHO recommendations from 4 to 6 months. He said that the main purpose of WHO recommendations are for developing countries with extreme poverty and associated health problems and are aimed at preventing or at least reducing the high infant mortality rates in those countries. This recommendation apparently is connected to young babies exposure to contaminated water supplies by preventing babies younger than 6 months exposure to water bourne diseases. A 6 month old baby will be bigger and better able to recover from gastro which is a major cause of infant mortality.

What this means is that in Australia (in most places) the risk is not as dire as we have reliable water supply so between 4 and 6 months is suitable.

squishysmum, I don't understand how your friends baby was anaemic because they didn't start solids early. I always thought that until 6 mths babies don't get much nutritional value from solids anyway and everything required for their bodies comes from milk (whether bf or ff)until around the 6 mth mark. Even when I started my babies at 4 mths (as was recommended)I was under the impression that it wasn't a nutritional necessity. I'm not asking to be argumentative but out of genuine curiosity.

I have a new baby now and will wait until 6 mths but don't see a real problem in starting a little early myself..And by early I mean after 4 mths.

You are right, we don't. However my understanding is that solids, especially rice cereal, contain iron for that very reason. And the CHN explained increasing iron needs as the reason for putting babies on solids at 6 months, when breast milk on its own can no longer supply everything they need. However due to individual variation, this might apply at different ages for different babies. My baby is starting to crawl at 5 months and uses heaps of energy in the process. His cousin is several months older and doesn't crawl. I would expect their nutritional requirements to be different.



No offence taken. I never claimed to be an expert, quite the opposite. I have no idea what I am doing which my reason for often seeking advice on various topics. I have asked opinions, read books, and at the mother's group, solids were discussed with the CHN.

Instinct by definition is something very different to medical knowledge.

I do feed DS pretty often (two hourly during the day). I don't always have enough milk, but that is another story. However if breast milk does not contain enough iron, giving him more might give him more nourishment but no more iron.

I am all for following guidelines and research findings. However this sometimes has to be adapted to the individual's needs.

Having read a whole thread yesterday that degenerated very rapidly, I will now bail out of this one before the punches start flying!

The recommendation to leave solids until 6 months didn't come into until all three of mine were born, fed, etc. They all started around 4 months, they were all ready to, especially number 2 who was swiping food whenever he could (he was 5kgs at birth - no typo - unlike one pp, there's been no weight issue related to starting solids then, he's still tall for his age, but as wiry as anything). It's hard to imagine that my three, and all of their peers, were harmed by starting solids earlier than the current recommendations. Mine were happier, fuller and, yes, slept better on solids as they were fuller and more sated.

Rose

This is a timely one for me as DS is 5 1/2 months and ive been giving him a taste of solids for nearly a week now and hes loving it. He'd been interested in what we eat for a month but i put it off as long as i could.
Doesnt make him sleep more though-i wish ! lol

I know of a baby that started solids at around 3 weeks. It was ridiculous. It was filling up on 3 meals a day of jarred food and not drinking much.Obviously getting a lot of the wrong things for it's age. That baby is the scrawniest fussiest looking kid ever, last I saw it was when it was about 6 months of age and very thin.

And this was on advice from a dr! I told the mother to please get a second opinion...lol.
What a joke.

That is an extreme case of course, as I'm sure most mothers would NOT be starting that early.

I preferred to wait until the 6 months with my DD, that is when she started to show interest and I followed her lead.

I remember when I was in hospital having DD, a few of the nurses were talking about a woman that had just given birth that day trying to feed her newborn solids!

I hadnt had much to do with newborns before my DD came along but even I knew starting a newborn on solids is just crazy!!!

They said that they had tried to talk her out of it and convince her that she should not be giving a newborn solids but apparently it fell on deaf ears!

However, in saying that..I did start my DD on solids when she was 4 months old.

I think that was just a lack of knowledge on my part as she was always a good feeder and I thought at the time..well ..on the cans of baby food it states from 4 months so it must be ok!

all this talk about mums giving their babies food early just makes me want to laugh. there was a few mums that had a go at me around the age i started feeding DD (4 1/2 months) including some here. they started feeding their babies at EXACTLY 6 months. to the day.

now i didnt start feeding DD cause she wasnt sleeping properly and i wanted a full nights sleep like some silly people have said before. i started feeding her because at 4 months she would grab food out of my hands and try to eat them. i realised she wanted to try food so i gave her some rice cereal. it was nothing about wanting to make her sleep longer it was totally about her learning new things/new experiences.

when a childs extrusion reflex (when the tounge comes out and pushes the food out and not swallows it) is gone then that child is ready to eat. this may be 6 months, 8 months or 3 months. it varies. many kids reflex goes around 5 months. honestly why does it matter if you start solids one month early? if the child is ready and has no reflex to spit it out then what does it matter?

a childs reflex will not go away if it wasnt ready. people who wait till exactly 6months make me laugh...why wait till the day they turn 6 months. give them a go, they'll decide when its time. i cant believe how much people try to control these days!

Ok so when she used to grab the keys out of your hand did you decided she was ready to drive????

Just because your child was grabbing food from your hand doesn't mean she is ready for solid foods. She was probably curious as to what you were holding and wanted to get a closer look. I am sure if you were holding a fluro texta she would grab at that to, doesn't mean she should taste one.

I don't think driving and eating ink really equates with eating. Of course you partly read your child's signals - isn't that encouraged? Toilet training, sleep, bf etc - we're always told to read your baby's signals. Why should food be so different? For the vast majority, food is sustenance and pleasure - it's part of being human. It's only scary and dangerous - as driving and eating ink can be - if your child is one of the small percentage with serious allergy issues.

Rose

Feeding = sleeps
Not in this house...

Ok, for those of you saying don't start solids until 6 months. Why? Can you give a real reason as to why you can't? I'm not particularly arguing with the stance, I'm just curious if everyone actually knows why not.

When DS was 4 months he was ready to try some "solids". He was very interested in food. I did the research for myself and found that actually for most kids from 4 months is fine. From 4 to 6 months I gave him one meal a day of either rice cereal, stewed apple or stewed pear. It made him happy. I discussed it with my GP and she had absolutely no problem with it. The only person who had a problem with it was the early childhood nurse. She gave me a lecture. When I quizzed her about it and pointed out the research that I'd seen her answer was "parents just don't know when to stop.. as soon as they think they can give them solids they start putting anything in their mouths". At which point I turned off.

Having said that, I probably wouldn't do that again. I'd wait until 6 months... just in case.

And that is part of the problem Kate. People look to the tins for advice and if it says from 4 months then it must mean 4 months is when you start solids. There is a push at the moment to get all the tins displaying from SIX months only.

I cannot understand why people would feed thier children solid food when they are still newborns.

Yes, I totally agree Lex.


I didnt look into it and just assumed it was perfectly normal to start feeding my baby solids at 4 months.

I think my sister even suggested starting her on baby food at that time too as she had started to feed her children solids at that age.

I thought, well my sister has 3 children, Im a new mother...she obviously knows more then me.

Putting 'from 6 months' on the tins would be a good start!

~Sal wrote:
"Ok, for those of you saying don't start solids until 6 months. Why? Can you give a real reason as to why you can't?"

Up until recently, there was of course a solid body of evidence saying that starting non-breastmilk foods before 4 months is risky - not because of obesity, but because of risks like coeliac disease, allergy, diabetes type I, various infections, etc.

More recently, there is data that starting at 4-6 months compared to six months also carries risk. One example is a USAn paper showing that starting before six months but after four months is associated with a pretty dramatically increased risk of pneumonia - over quadruple the risk. They also noted about a doubled risk of repeated ear infections. (The authors controlled for childcare, smoke exposure, demographic variables and so on.)

The WHO recommendations for exclusive breastfeeding for six months are aimed at all children in all countries, not just in developing countries.

Companies advertising solids as suitable for 4 months are violating the WHO Code on the marketing of breastmilk substitutes. Unfortunately, the Code isn't enforced in law in Australia, only by toothless "voluntary" agreements. Sad.

Lots more info here.
http://www.kellymom.com/nutrition/solids/delay-solids.html

Lara

the study reference is here
"Full Breastfeeding Duration and Associated Decrease in Respiratory Tract Infection in US Children"
Caroline J. Chantry, Cynthia R. Howard and Peggy Auinger
Pediatrics 2006;117;425-432

mollykathleen,
I don;t think the lack of toungue extrusion, or showing interest in food is in any way linked to a baby's ability to digest food and absorb nutrients.

A child of three months is probably not ready for anything but formula or breastmilk.

Yes, there are exceptions - usually for valid medical reasons. But "My baby seemed ready" is not a reason: it's an excuse.

I wouldn’t give solids for the sole purpose of getting my baby to sleep all night at 2 or 3 months of age, for 3 reasons
1 - babies don’t necessarily sleep all night when given solids
2 - I wanted to wait until 6 months (I did a lot of research into this)
3 - I kinda knew when I signed up to be a mum that it could be a long time until I got a full nights sleep, and tbh it really doesn't bother me that much.



I think that is part of the problem. I know IRL 1 person who gave their baby solids at 4 months ‘because that’s what the jars and tins at the shops say’. I didn’t say anything to her at the time and when she later discovered that 6 months was the recommended time she asked why I didn’t say anything to her and that if she had known she would never have started at 4 months!

In reality, I think she was just frustrated at herself for not doing her homework, but I felt like a pretty crappy friend for not saying anything.



Why so? They are trusting the experts who have medical degrees, who have spent countless hours researching, and who are experts in their field.

I wouldn't diagnose an illness in my child, I would leave that to the experts.

IMO I think complying with current research by child health and medical experts is a preferable option than the alternative.

But really, this topic just goes round and round and round in circles

My GP and my CHN fully supported me starting DS1 on solids at 4 months - he was hungry all the time. It wasn't as if he started on a full roast dinner. Farex, stewed fruit and steamed vegetables was all he had on the menu.

It made him a much happier baby and far more settled. No he didn't sleep through the night - that took a few more months but at least day time feeds were further apart than 1 1/2 to 2 hours.

I chose not to supplement with formula - my choice and I'm sure this could buy an argument as well....

We'll see what happens with DS2 closer to the time - at present he is far more settled and feeds much better than DS1 so maybe we'll get to 6 months, but if we don't I'll do what is necessary for my child to put on weight and be healthy.

How on earth could this possibly always correlate with their gastro-intestinal system being physically ready to start processing solids?? Because that is where the problem actually lies....

I started my dd at 5 months with the support of dd's dr and child health nurse.

DD had never took to ether breast milk or Formula. It was a really battle to feed her. When I gave her the fist solids she had a look of 'at last something decent to eat' and we never looked back.

The decision to start dd at 5 months was not taken lightly. I did all the reading and got advice. I was worried that solids before six moths might do her some sort of harm because you here people going on about it so much.

But in the end I had to consider my child needs. DD was a big hungry girl who hate BM/Formula. She was 9kg at 5 months! She was clearly showing signs of being ready to start and I know that I made the best informed decision for my child. I never did it to make her sleep better although around the time she did start to sleep though.

12 kg is not that big to me. My dd is 15kg at 19 months. She was a big baby at birth and has always been a good size. Maybe this boy is just meant to be big and early solids has nothing to do with it? Not that I agree with starting solids that early but I don't think you can say it's responsible for a child's size.

i thought if you fed baby before around 6 months it may leave babe open to allergies.

I've debated getting back on this merry-go-round..and can't resist

what I wanted to add- sometimes people start their babies early with LOTS of advice to do so. I've been critisied here before for starting DD at around 4.5 months (and not so she would sleep either!).
But when I point out to people that I am a paediatric nurse, that I consulted three paediatricians, two child health nurses and two paediatric dieticians (not to mention my nursey friends) people get very quiet all of a sudden.

I planned to wait until 6 months, thats what I tell my patients to do, it is the current recommendation based on the best available research. This may change again, it may not.

Every child is different, there are a dozen reasons to start early, some are good ones (anameia, failure to thrive that defy's milk feeding), some are not( so the baby will sleep, because they reach for your spoon).
I think as long as we give people as much information as we can we have to then respect the decision they come to. It is afterall, their child.

edited for dodgy spelling!

Hmmm, so many things come into vogue these days. Don't eat dairy,do eat dairy etc. Feeding solids I think is an individuals decision. One I'm sure most parents don't rush into half heartedly. When I was a child I don't know if my parents followed todays "recommendations" (Oh I'm 39 and grew up on a dairy farm in NZ), so city to country living can be dramatically different. Anyways its an interesting topic.

Maybe my DD is just small for her age? She is 19 months old and weighs about 12.5kg. She was 3.92kg at birth. I agree that the early introduction of solids may not be responsible for his large size although you wouldn't think a jar of honey a fortnight would have helped the matter.

I have never understood starting solids earlier. Not only is it not recommended BUT why on earth would you start all that mess and extra work any earlier than you have to??????

Besides which my boys slept LESS after starting solids so I could never promote that idea........

honestly - i have seen the reverse of babes fed quite early for the purpose of 'having them sleep' as usually (warning general sweeping statement coming) this children are being fed things that shouldn't be fed to them at that age and they cannot digest them.

my girls started at 4.5mths - why - negative weight issues, they were constantly hungry and if they had had their way they would have had solids at 6w - we tried thickener/splitting feds/water - you name it, i did it cause i *knew* that 6mths was the recommendation.

now i have 2 healthy well adjusted babes, no allergy issues, developmentally swimming along perfectly (if not apparently slightly ahead of the norm - whatever that is) - will eat the home cooked meals i make them and are happy to do so.

i'm with catnat - honestly i wish they were drinking solely formula, it's a nightmare and esp in those early days when it's milk before solids i was feeding (we only started solids then milk at 8mths) from 6.5m - 8mths something (be it solids or milk) every 2 hrs - that is totally insane.

i spoke to paeds/GP's/clinic nurses before making this decision, it was not one i entered into lightly - but their weight was going backwards, constantly screaming - something had to give and they have been happy since.

do i feel guilty everyday - yup i sure do.

something interesting a MCHN mentioned though - if i was fed nothing but formula (which has the same taste everytime unlike breastmilk that varies in taste according to mothers diet) i would get bored with it as well and probably want something different.

my girls were 2.41 and 2.66 at birth at 37.3w, at 8.5mths weigh 9.75 and 10.05kg - we are big ppl so genetically they are screwed - we too worried about obesity but i think it's more about creating a healthy relationship with food than a lot of other factors.

jmo

That's what I think too Cat! The longer you wait the less work involved. I tend to go with the idea that if it needs too much prepartion ie boiling and stewing and pressing through a seive then they probably don't need it yet. If you wait until 6 months plus then you can just fork-mash and very soon they are old enough for finger foods.

BTW I am of the understanding that in most cases there is plenty of iron in breastmilk to meet a child's requirements until they start solids, be that at 4 months, 6 months, 8 months or even later. Once they start solids the cereal and fibre they are eating interferes with iron absorbtion from the BM, so they therefore need to eat more food with iron in it. While they are still having only BM and nothing else they are usually fine. That's why they add iron to rice cereal. The babies need more iron once they start the cereal because they are eating the cereal, not the other way round.
tigerfilly

I'm sorry manfurme, but the most upsetting thing I've read on this thread is that you have felt guilty since putting your girls on solids, despite the fact they have thrived, at 4.5months - which is after the age recommended when my kids were babes. Which isn't in the dark ages - they're only 5, 6 and 7.

Why would you feel guilty??? If they're thriving, you're doing the right thing. It really does break my heart the extent to which so many of us, myself included, spend the early years stressed, guilty, worried. These things are all guidelines, not instructions. To be honest, once they grow up a little, you can't help wondering why you got so stressed about the details.

That was my understanding too...that the iron in breastmilk is more easily absorbed by the body than the inorganic iron added to cereals and therefore they need less measurable amounts. Did that make sense??? And, I know that I get constipated with inorganic iron supplements (and still remain aneamic), why wouldn't a baby have similar problems?

At mums group the echn said *if* you start solids before 6 months that it might as well be fruit and vegetables and not rice cereal because they dont need the iron until after 6 months anyway.

I held off giving solids for as long as i could (until 6 months) because giving the booby is so much easier than preparing food, and washing up. I guess im just a bad mum eh?

Its my issue.

I was the last of my mums group to start solids - their babies were all around the same age as mine.
I sort of felt like I was being left behind because they all started their kids on solids before 6 months.

You're right no one says your a bad mum.