If we had no weaning rules and guidelines, how would we do it, instinctively?

[AndOutComeTheBoobs]

No books, no internet, no mother in law giving you tips.

Just a baby and parents. How does weaning occur naturally?

Is it when the baby starts to put things in their mouth (but this happens every young - 3 months?) is it when they start to crawl and grab at things (this can be much later, if at all if you're my second son).
Is it when the baby reaches out for the parents food?

How would a parent wean a baby before all science and knowledge?

I grew up in a developing country and I think weaning is quite crazy tbh! I just sat the baby on my knee whilst I ate and they helped themself to what they fancied with their hands. Or I would pop a bit of whatever I thought they should try into their mouth. It never occurred to me to make special food or use a jar.

Babies were sometimes weaned very early, and gin was a popular early item. Beer often safer than water too.

Babies given gin?! I don't think that's historically accurate 🤨

I think they’ve got it Backwards. It should be where someone pops cake and food and gin in the mums mouth instead.

My gran who is 103 said she started when her kids were able to sit up and were no longer content to just lie in their cot while the rest of the family sat together at the dinner table. So she would just sit them up and give them a mushed up plate of dinner and see what happened. She was a bit vague though about what sort of age that would have been.

I was talking to a friend about this recently. I hold BLW responsible for my 3 year old being a highly fussy, highly restrictive eater. The problem with BLW and DS was that it focused on shapes and textures but not a range of flavours, and new foods were just introduced too slowly. DS will not eat anything mixed together, any sauces, gravies, soups, stews. He won't taste or try new things. The list of what he will eat is very small.

I now feel I should have gone with my instincts rather than a book. Next time I will combine whole foods with homemade purees and be more flexible. Ds's diet is the bane of my life!

I weaned all 3 of mine using traditional weaning methods. I have one who will eat anything and everything, one who is a bit picky and doesn’t eat meat cos of the texture, and the youngest has asd and sensory issues so will only eat a restrictive set of foods.
I personally don’t think it makes a difference how you wean, just do what you’re comfortable with as a parent and like you said use your instincts.

Babies given gin?!

You can’t give a baby booze.

@LittleAndOften When I started BLW in 2012/ 2013, it was basically 'give your child everything' so I did, including pasta sauce, gravy, ketchup, soup... Basically if it was on my plate and she wasnt allergic, she could have it. The only thing I watched out for was honey and spice or too much salt. I introduced purees to my middle as she prefered to be spoon fed and she is my fussiest child, I think it depends on the child rather than the way they are weaned

scienceofmom.com/2015/05/14/starting-solids-4-months-6-months-or-somewhere-in-between/

"Contrary to the expectation of a prolonged period of breast-milk as the sole source of infant nutrition, solid foods were introduced before one month of age in one-third of the cultures, at between one and six months in another third, and was postponed more than six months for only one-third." This was in 180 non-industrialized cultures.

In a more recent study (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11584094), 5-6 months was found to be the most common starting age.

In traditional cultures, methods of introducing foods vary quite a lot, but there is usually a mixture of mashing/premasticating ("pre-chewing") foods, and letting babies thieve bits from adults (inevitable when you have got a grabby baby in your lap). You help them out as and when necessary. Common sense.

Elaborate weird baby purees in "stages" are a modern invention. The same, however, can also be said about the "rules" of BLW (putting the baby in a highchair, sitting on your hands refusing to "help" the baby, and letting them waste tons of food as they chuck things on the floor).

I don't think anyone is suggesting to give babies alcohol in this day and age but certainly people did in the past, as it makes them sleep!

"Babies given gin?! I don't think that's historically accurate"

It's the active ingredient in traditional gripe water....

I had a dummy regularly dipped in Rum as a baby according to my family.

I think the idea that BLW (with or without the angst!) is the 'natural' way of doing it ignores how precious food has been for most people for most of history. I've been mostly enjoying doing BLW with DS, but I found it quite painful throwing away so much food that had been held once then thrown on the floor in the early months, and that was just a general aversion to food waste, not because I actually have any concern about us not having enough food. I think the urge to make sure the food actually went in the baby's mouth would be pretty strong if food is scarce.

"Contrary to the expectation of a prolonged period of breast-milk as the sole source of infant nutrition, solid foods were introduced before one month of age in one-third of the cultures, at between one and six months in another third, and was postponed more than six months for only one-third." This was in 180 non-industrialized cultures.

Again, though, the line between 'food' and 'milk substitute' is a bit hazy here. In some cultures it's common to give honey instead of colostrum to a newborn (yes, really) and I guess that would fall into 'solid foods before one month' but I don't think it's really 'weaning'.

My Nan used to give me rum as a baby. There was a big rum trade in her NW of England town. My friend’s Nan also used to give her rum. Their family were from Jamaica. Neither of our mothers knew till it was too late!

The problem with BLW and DS was that it focused on shapes and textures but not a range of flavours, and new foods were just introduced too slowly.

I don't really quite understand what you were doing here - I gave him what I was eating, so he was offered several new foods every meal for the first few weeks (until our cooking looped back round!). He didn't always try everything put in front of him, but I can't imagine how he'd have had more new tastes with puree? Were you trying to avoid mess and so only giving dry foods?

They get lost of different tastes and introducing lots of different foods early (plus breastfeeding alongside introduction) reduces allergies, which may one of the reasons why they were an unknown phenomenon in days gone by.

They had allergies in days gone by, as early as 1AD the Romans knew that "what is food to one man, is poison to another" and by the 1600s 'summer asthma' and 'rose catarrh' (aka, hayfever) were known ailments. For more serious allergies throughout history the sufferers would have simply died at a relatively young age but it would have been documented as something else, if it was documented at all, because they didn't have the knowledge to say it was allergies. A lot of babies with CMPA would have wasted away and died of 'failure to thrive', people who died of an anaphylactic reaction to something would have died of 'a choking fit' or 'a great swelling' or 'an apoplexy' or words to that effect.

For more serious allergies throughout history the sufferers would have simply died at a relatively young age but it would have been documented as something else

Yes, I've read that this might be one reason why nuts are considered such a choking hazard (people get much more concerned about them than about other food stuffs of a similar size, shape and hardness) - that a lot of people 'choking' on nuts were really having an allergic reaction. On a lower level, people certainly had intolerances they didn't see as such - my gran would claim that they 'didn't have intolerances in her day' but would then happily list all the foods that 'didn't agree with her'.

It does seem to be true that there has been an increase in allergies in the western world, though - no one knows why, though the 'too clean' hypothesis (that it's because our immune systems have a lot fewer genuine threats to respond to - the absence of gut parasites has been suggested as particularly important) is quite popular. There's good evidence that weaning before 14 weeks or delaying the introduction of allergenic foods beyond a year both increase allergy rates; the evidence for in between is more mixed.

Yes I suppose people would have died of anaphylactic shock and not known BUT there’s been a dramatic increase in allergy in the past 10 years alone and western countries that wean more towards 4 months have much lower rates than the U.K. I think Sweden has about 3% compared to our 10% child allergy rate. The EAT/LEAP study was very large and pretty conclusive. I think there was a reduction of about 80% in introducing peanuts earlier.

In what age groups did they count the numbers with anaphylaxis?

Until 2004, the NHS recommended weaning age was 4 months (up from 3 months about a decade before)

I decided not to listen to any guidelines. I guess I did instinctively and made some mistakes, also not sure if still doing it right but he seems happy and gaining weight so I reckon all good. I was given a lot of info but it was overkill and everyone contradicts each other so I just went with my gut

The full FSA report on the study was written in 2015. Until quite recently the nhs advised not to introduce allergens

www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/media/document/eat-study-full-report.pdf

The UK Government infant feeding information leaflet for parents, “Weaning – starting solid food”, adopts a more pragmatic target of around six months exclusive breastfeeding.7 It also states that if a mother decides to introduce complementary foods before six months, there are some foods that should be avoided as they may cause allergies including: “wheat-based foods...eggs, fish, shellfish, nuts (and) seeds.”

It’s not so much the 6 month guideline that’s wrong, I think it’s the advice to hold off giving children allergens. Although I do remember reading a piece from the consultant who conducted part of the study that 6 months was almost certainly too late to prevent egg allergy. The nhs has now updated it’s advice to say there’s no evidence that delaying intro of allergens prevents allergy but IMO it’s doesn’t go far enough.

Babies given gin?! I don't think that's historically accurate
Yup. They used to give them opiates too. You could buy over the counter syrups that contained morphine to keep your baby doped up and quiet. Lots of kids died, either from overdose or simply starvation due to appetite suppression.

They used to give them opiates too. You could buy over the counter syrups that contained morphine to keep your baby doped up and quiet.

Yes - it's been argued that Marx's famous 'opium is the religion of the people' was supposed to allude to drugged babies, not adults.

The nhs has now updated it’s advice to say there’s no evidence that delaying intro of allergens prevents allergy but IMO it’s doesn’t go far enough.

Agreed. There's a huge cultural hang-up from the 'one food at a time, hold off on allergens for as long as possible' advice. I considered following the EAT protocol for DS (he has eczema so is moderately high risk), didn't for various reasons (including his total lack of interest in being fed from a spoon) but did make sure I was including lots of the high-allergenic foods right from the beginning when he did start having food, just before six months. I got told that he shouldn't be having peanuts (in smooth peanut butter), or indeed that he should just be having fruit and veg a lot.