"Baby has never had sugar"

[itsascottishbaby]

Was chatting to friends today, we all have nearly 1 year olds. One said "My DD has never had sugar", and the others all chimed in to say the same.

My DS has had quite a bit of sugar - only tiny bits like a tiny morsel off a croissant, a baby biscuit or a taste of cake.

AIBU to think they might be stretching the truth? Or am I the odd one out, and a bad parent to boot?

Pretty sure my 16 mo's diet is 80% sugar...

Bet they have eaten fruit yoghurts, stewed fruit, etc etc. They perhaps think these are sugar free, and only chocolate and cake contain sugar.

My dd2 was given sugar water in hospital at a day old ! When they told me she had 'been good and had her sweeties' I thought wtf? Turns out she had sugar water when they did her cannula....
She was breastfed till 2, had organic puréed food and only very occasional 'treats' just because that was how I'd done things with my other dc.
Aged 3 y 1 m she developed type 1 diabetes which was triggered by either a viral infection or a tummy bug and yet the amount of people who said to me "oh you must regret giving her sweets now" or "what were you feeding her that she got diabetes so young??" Was astounding!
Sugar occasionally (as in treats not fruit sugar or milk sugars) isn't the demon everyone thinks it is. As part of a healthy well balanced diet it's fine. My dcs have cake on their birthday, ice cream when we go on holiday and sweets at friends parties etc. As babies they didn't but that seems to be common sense to introduce veg and fruit etc first before they even know what treats are !

It still surprised me that in the nnu they give sugar water though !

My DD swallowed practically nothing but breastmilk (and only from the source) or water before 18 months. I started out weaning full of superior ideas about not giving refined sugar; by the time she was 12months I would have been delighted if she ate anything, even cake or chocolate!

She eats well now, aged 3.

I think they meant processed sugar?
Human milk has more sugar (lactose) than cow's milk

Absolutely, it's very sweet.

Of course you're not a bad parent, each to their own.

I waited till 18 months with mine because I wanted to help develop savoury tooth buds and an interest in lots of different savoury flavours. Seemed to work for us.

I'm fairly certain DD's diet is about 47% wax crayon at the minute (budding artist ).

Competitive parenting is twatty and pointless. Ignore them-they're probably talking shit.

Have you ever tasted breast milk? It is like kendal mint sweat cake....
Formula then attempts to mimic this.

Ignore them, it's just ridiculous overtly virtuous competitive PFB parenting, a little bit of something sweet here and there is not going to kill your baby or harm them long term in any way shape or form. I let DD have a morsel of cake or gingerbread on occasion, much better than her screaming the place down because I won't share with her, she knows when I offer her cucumber sticks that it isn't what I'm eating and that is what she wants. I admit I wasn't impressed when a family member gave her pretty much an entire creme brûlée when I went to the loo when out for dinner but I can't get too het up about it. I've also tasted my own breast milk and it is insanely sweet, like the leftover milk when you've had sugary cereal, so I reckon a sweet tooth will develop whether you give treats or not

I think it's a mistake to overthink it. My son (aged 2) eats everything (and that involves a lot of veg) but I still gave him some chocolate after his dinner today. He'd had veggie curry and three(!) satsumas, meh.

Sugar was most definitely not the worst thing that either of mine had eaten at a year old.

There might have been wax crayon involved, certainly :o

Yeah they will be thinking that something that contains "only natural fruit sweeteners" ie fructose is in some way better than something that contains sucrose. It is not any different - both get broken down into glucose.

I've read fructose is actually worse. Something very scientific. But apparently harder for the body to break it down.

Definitely possible to not give a child processed sugar that's been added to products, but no natural sugar would be impossible!

I was under the impression breastmilk is incredibly sugary. I also thought it was packed with not just lactose but also high levels of straight glucose, to feed our massive human brains.

Am I wrong on that?

NNU gives sucrose to babies before cannula insertion etc. it's a known painkiller.
The ampules are only 5ml and it works a treat
I remember my neice being given a chunk of milky bar to chew on when teething I think that's a bit too far but she's grown into a fine woman, with lovely teeth

I get lectured by family on how much sugar DC3 and 4 eat, they eat everything else as well and they're perfectly healthy.

Sucrose is fructose and glucose, so I don't think it's worse than fructose.

Glucose is the best, it's 'honest'. Fructose has been evolved by plants to trick fruit eaters into eating excessive amounts, enough to ensure timely passing of the seeds + manure without too much of the resources in the fruit being extracted by the consumers, which would risk reducing the efficacy of the manure.

It was when they said to me dd had had 'sweeties' I was still not really with it and thought what???! Sweets??! I had visions in my post cs state of a newborn and a bag of pic n mix !

Stretching the truth definitely.

I think even hummus has sugar in.

Then there's all fruit, most cereals, milk as mentioned, etc.

Yeah they're talking Bollocks.

If they were thinking about it, then they would be thinking about processed food which has added sucrose. Or juice rather than fruit.

Sucrose is made of glucose + fructose - it's the fructose which is harder for our bodies to process. Sugar in milk doesn't have fructose - but will still rot your teeth.

In fruit it's tied up with lots of fibre which is why fruit good, juice bad - all the fibre is gone and you drink far more juice than you would eat apples so more sugar goes in.

Finally anyone who thinks their baby hasn't eaten sugar but has given them baby biscuits is just delusional.

When dd was a baby (learning to crawl type age) my two best friends used to look in absolute horror as I gave her the odd chocolate button or taste of my food. Their babies were only ever given healthy snacks, never anything sugary or unhealthy. Guess who has the most varied and healthy diet now?

I guess too that they meant refined sugar.

Of course their kids have had sugar. They presumably eat fruit and vegetables, which do contain their own types of it, in considerable quantities. It is sugar. Can't avoid it.

They sound insufferable.

Oh has anyone said raisins? They have loads of sugar.

Reminds me of all those wanky "sugar free" recipes, full of maple syrup or honey.

You sound like you have a sensible approach. My PFB had no sugar (I.e. Sugar that is added to products) until she was 18 months or so. That was because it's official advice amd I followed it to the letter. However on second I have given him bites of sweet stuff I'm eating. Because I've realised they just mean don't give them added sugar in their daily diet. They won't actually explode if you give them a bit of a biscuit.