to HATE all this new fangled, internet baby advice stuff

[LeBFG]

Of the sort:

breastfeeding necklaces (like this) give baby learning opportunities and stop them from getting brain damaged

lack of ''tummy time'' is to blame for all sorts of things from cognitive development to ability to read. I mean, really? We are damaging our children for life if they don't spend 10mins a day on their bellies?

And tons of others, including my old favorite, the BLW fad where babies practice their fine motor skills, jaw muscle movement and coordinating swallowing, which is helpful because otherwise they would never get a chance to do these things with purees and finger food.

All of these ^ things are good ideas, so why don't they just stop at that. Why do they have to tack on life-altering, super-duper brain development shit to sell the idea?

MmeL - I wear DSs amber necklace as a bracelet now, useless but yes, very pretty!

I'm with Mdmlindor (did i soell that right?!) but would add that much of this isn't new!

As I mentioned earlier, babies have been enjoying (or not!) tummy time for years/decades. It's just recently been branded as "tummy time". Even so, plenty of babies protest too much to ever do it, and still develop at the same rate as others.

This thread has given me an idea. I will never wear any of my necklaces again. I made them when I was suffering really bad pnd and it was a distraction for me. They are all sitting in boxes in my cupboard. I have approximately 200 bracelets and 100 necklaces to give away. Anyone want some jewellery? I also have pandora style charm bracelets and some shamballa style bracelets. All free to a good home. Pm me if you are interested.

Ps none of it is baby/toddler proof bitter

Is there any evidence that BLW reduces overeating (and therefore excess weight) as children grow older, or is that just another 'commonsense' argument?

I'm not dismissing it. Like most parents of my vintage, mine and friends' babies were feeding themselves all manner of things by 6 months - we just started earlier and built up to it, and spoonfed alongside. Which I understand isn't BLW, but it's not a million miles away - or at least the aim wasn't.

When eating it takes the brain a while to realise that the stomach is full. When spoon feeding the food is going down a lot quicker than when a baby eats by BLW method.

You've not seen my baby DS eat! We spoon feed the first part of the meal (porridge for example) and by doing so we slow down his eating. When it's then followed up with fruit for him to eat himself it gets inhaled at the speed of light!

We've done a mixture of spoon and finger food from first weaning and he can't get it into himself quick enough and would keep eating until we say no more. No off switch in sight (was bf on demand and no encouragement to finish the last bit).

I have some friends who are very anti-spoon. The pressure they put themselves under is incredible. They take every dire warning about the perils of spoon-feeding to heart and are the sort of people who would believe that guff posted above from the bf necklace site. It's not right that some of these companies/bloggers target vulnerable new parents.

It should just be presented as one alternative, not the only way to do it otherwise you mess your child up for life. No-one needs that additional pressure for something like BLW or bf necklaces.

(Of course for genuine safety advances such as back to sleep it should be publicised.)

What has made children more overweight has nothing whatsoever to do with how they were fed as babies. I'd put more blame on the fastfood culture and sitting in front of a screen rather than playing outside.

Didn't do tummy time as actually the research I'd fine suggested it was a bit of overkill. Actually, access to the internet, if you can sift and judge information well, is very helpful in being able to judge the value of whatever advice you're being given (whether by HVs, midwives, MIL, Betty down the road or whoever). I find lots of resources I use for research on the internet very useful. Despite badgering from HV etc about tummy time we never bothered as DD is unusually strong and was lifting head up at 2 wks, say unaided at 5mo and crawling at 6mo despite no tummy time. If DD had been hypotonic or had less good head control I'd probably have bothered more.

Have always found MN excellent at furnishing good sound research-led advice; yes easier to use if you are adept at sifting information and making judgments about its reliability and veracity. The thing to do is to avoid fora where people are giving one another non-research led anecdotal advice ("I put rusks in my big hungry baby's bottle at 2 months and widened the teat with a pin and it never did him any harm etc.")

*sitting not say, bloody autocorrect. Also tried to change rusks for risks which sounds about right ;)

Jenai Morris These links might help you make up your mind.

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120209135842.htm

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/02/120206214220.htm

What is a breastfeeding necklace?
I think I want one.

The sample size for the first link is way too small to prove anything.

My mum's a health visitor. She's sixty and retiring next month. Obviously, she's not my health visitor, but: she birthed her children naturally. She breastfed all three of us til two/three years each. She was an early advocate of baby led weaning.

I: had a horrific first birth, with no tear, no physical trauma, just an unbearable experience I couldn't handle emotionally because of the pain with my first son. I tried, with my mum's encouragement to breast feed - no go. Second child, after twelve years, elcs due to secondary tokophobia, no probs, another healthy boy without the birth trauma. Again, she encouraged me to breast feed, again, I didn't after trying for a couple of days.

It's not always hvs who are out of touch, sometimes it's mums like me!

Yes I think there isn't enough research been done on it yet, I'm sure more will come along with higher figures in time, but the ones they have done so far do point in the direction Jenai was asking about.

If it was really the case though then all those people born in the 1950s etc would be obese and there would be less childhood obesity now.

I rather think the reverse is the case tbh.

That's a massive generalisation youthecat

God, people are defensive.

As long as a baby/child is not being neglected or abused, what does it matter?

Most people do the best they can don't they? If they're not sure they seek advice from parents, midwives, health visitors, friends, books and the internet. I don't see what's wrong with that apart from the advertisers that prey on the vulnerable and the ill informed.

What works for one baby may not work for another, hence the breadth of ideas. Judging people for their decisions because they're not the same as yours seems daft to me if it's not detrimental to the child.

Yes, but there were a lot fewer obese children in the 50s/60s/70s, when spoon feeding was probably the norm, than there are now.

My children are very slim and seem ok so far.

Who's judging roundtable?

Ok. Seen the necklace- no likey!
That advertising blurb is really awful and the product looks naff.
Advertising s a bit shit though isn't it? Designed to pray on our insecurities.

Not sure I'd put recommending a bit of tummy time in the same category though.

I fed the 13 year old the same as the one year old. Bits to hold. Bits on spoon. Bits fed. Bits fed himself. Worked for number one, so...

There are many other factors that come into play with what you are suggesting. You are being very naive.
These factors will come into play now just like they did then.
Doesn't mean the research is wrong or that it won't be proven further to be correct with bigger numbers to be tested on.
Doesn't mean it will be proven wrong either I might add.
Results are results. We'll see.

The people who poo poo any idea that's different to their own imo. Youjustmet

*right