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?

I think I'm doing what most do?

I did what you're doing, Caff.

There's a hell of a lot more factors that will lead to a child being over weight than BLW (not that I think there is anything wrong with it).

People should do what is right for them and their child and stop putting enormous amounts of pressure people because of spurious research.

Pressure

A poster asked if there was any research at all. I gave her some to have a look at.

That is all.

It's not very sound research though.

You only questioned the numbers in the first link, and there is not a whole wade of research that has been done yet to give her.

I gave her what I found. No pressure, I posted two links with no other words of so called 'pressure' as you are insinuating I did. Just something to look at, as she actually asked for some.

The problem with that research isn't the sample size. It's that parents who do BLW are more likely to be middle class women who read up on latest recommendations - the kind of women [sweeping generalisation alert] who don't plonk baby in front of cbeebies with a Greggs sausage roll and a frootshoot.

If spoon feeding alone was the issue, why weren't we all obese? Most of us were spoon fed.

Tbh, I don't think it matters how you feed your child half as much as what you give them, and how much exercise they get as toddlers.

Indeed, Mme.

Even having read the abstracts YouJust linked to, I can't help but think that BLW is being vested with magical powers. Someone will be along suggesting that babies who are exclusively fed the BLW way suffer from the lack of one-to-one interaction spoonfed babies have (the same kind of tosh trotted out about formula...).

I think you get over zealous twats in every walk of life. Unfortunately, although they are usually a minority, they're usually the most vocal.

Some babies like picking up their food and won't tolerate someone trying to feed them.

Some babies prefer to be fed by their carer.

Some babies like both.

One thing that can be a problem is quantity and nutritious value. That includes past babyhood.

I don't think any of the ways above is the correct way to feed your child, but one of them will certainly be the best way for your child.

I do think purees are a great example of successful advertising though. But that's my opinion and no one else has to share it.

There is one single paper of research on BLW: the results are significant but unremarkable (small difference in favorite food group, small difference in BMI). The key flaw is BLW group are much more likely to bf for very long periods (about 60% over 20m from memory so don't quote me). They also show NO DIFFERENCE in fussiness.

Tummy time appears to be an invention of American pediatricians. Babies in different positions: good, stimulating etc. Rigid 15mins x2 each day = superior readers/writers/motor capabilities is crap. Sorry. It just is. I haven't got any research to prove this, how the hell could you even try and prove this stuff?

So there are things I wish to point out:

1/ outrageous scientific claims proponants make for their new fad
2/ endless things to worry about leading to guilt and worse in mums
3/ pernicious advertising

As an aside, even the weaning ages can be twisted. I, like a lot of you, think of 6 months as a rigid 'thou shalt not put spoon in baby's mouth before the age of 6 months has passed'. In fact, looking at the WHO wording (where all this 6 month stuff began), it says 6 months is the optimum age.

Google can be great. However, the baby parenting sites are frequently misleading. They copy and paste the info from each other - have you noticed this? Due to the nature of mums (worriers) you end up finding all the info mums want to know (see all those webpages listing signs of autism) without any balance.

Good post, leBFG.

I do think that parenting websites can be helpful, if you can get a range of opinions - see Mumsnet. What I like about the advice pages on here, is that they cover quite a range of options, with comments from the MNetters themselves.

There is a lot of guff being spouted as 'fact' with little or now scientific research or evidence behind it.

We also have to ask, is it important to change our child rearing practice with every bit of research that is published? Obviously some major changes of recommendations have brought about a significant change - such as the sleeping on back as part of SIDs campaign, which has saved the lives of countless babies.

Parents have to learn to trust their instincts on some things though, and not blindly follow rigid guidelines.

LeBFG: So my cohort of 1 was representative, then. Ah well. If Little Dish ever disappear I will cry, as we will be down to plain, boiled pasta or chips with ketchup for hot food