Farley's rusks

[pollysproggle]

Why do they have such a bad rap?

I must admit I don't really buy baby food products at all but was looking for a convenience finger food for my baby and found them tucked away on the bottom shelf.
The reduced sugar version seems absolutely fine as an occasional snack. I was comparing them to other items (ellas pouches for instance) and they have a third of the sugar contents of a fruit pouch. They're fortified in vitamins and minerals and my baby loved them.
I also found that they just dissolve in the mouth which is great if you're worried about choking as I am.

So for context, 1 reduced sugar rusk is 3.7g sugar, ellas the red one is over 10g of sugar and 100mls of whole milk is 4.7g of sugar.

I know they're different types of sugars but sugar is sugar and behaves the same way in the body.
Am I missing something? Compared to other baby food products they actually seem pretty good.

Milk is 5% sugar
Reduced sugar rusks are 20% sugar
Ella's red one is 11.5% sugar

Milk and the pouch have other nutrients whereas the rusk is just carbs.

I found rusks were too sweet and would i think would encourage a love of very sweet foods.

Rusks also once wet form a horrible big clump and are grim. I'd rather give a proper biscuit than that.

I still eat risks myself, all mashed up in warm milk. A lovely taste of childhood.

My DCs however had baby rice first then mashed vegetables until they could eat the same as us - poor deprived things

I don't like to give them as it sort of normalises the idea of a sweet biscuit as a snack, which I don't think is a great habit to get into. As an occasional treat I would just give something like a rich tea or malted milk - nutritionally similar and a lot cheaper.