EAT Study - WWYD?

[LifeOfKate]

Hi All,

We have had an invitation in the post to join a weaning/allergy study, details here

Basically it is a study into the effects of early introduction of allergenic foods (from 3 months old). The control group would be told to carry on as per current advice (exclusive BF until 6 months), the experimental group would have allergenic foods (wheat, dairy etc) introduced from 3 months old.

The researchers seem to think that it is actually later weaning that increases the risk of allergies.

I'm not sure whether to entertain the thought of being involved in this study, so thought I would ask all you lovely people on MN, WWYD or what do you think?

I'm also posting this on the weaning topic.

Thanks for confirming the ethics approval EAP .

I am taking part in this study. Having not thought about how long I would breastfeed (I never expected to continue for long, and didn't know anyone who had), when I signed up to the study I committed to exclusive breastfeeding for at least three months. This probably prevented me from giving an occasional bottle of formula early on. I am still breastfeeding at a year, I doubt I would be if I hadn't joined this study.

DS enjoyed the small amounts of food from 16 weeks, still eats very well, and fortunately has had no allergy problems, despite a family history of allergies.

I was also worried about feeling guilty if DS develops allergies, however it is not known whether early weaning will increase or decrease risk of allergies (hence the need for this study), so I may have felt guilty either way.

I would urge any eligible families to seriously look at this research.
We've just attended our 1 year appointment with the EAT team. What a year it's been.... my son was really sick shortly after our initial appointments. We were constantly fobbed off by our gp and local hospital. Without the advice, reassurance and all round support from the researchers I am sure Id have gone to pieces. I am not an idiot, I know we will be looked after because I am compliant with the study requirements but it seems a small price to pay for the expert care my darling boy has had. My son is allergic to milk and eggs. This was discovered at the 3 month appointment. He is now allergic to milk, egg, nuts, and legumes...so that's baked beans, peas, pulses....oh and cats. Now if anyone thinks I weaned my boy too early and have given him these allergies I think you're mad....besides...he's never eaten cat!
we travel over 300 miles round trip for our appointments. There is no comparable allergy service locally. So rather than have to explain to my son why we took part and feel guilty I will proudly tell him why me and his Dad drove for 3 hours to see his doctors!
I am still breast feeding at 13 months...no pressure to do this other than from my son! My boy has no bowel issues or other gastric side effects from my weaning him before 6 months.
Some of the posts here sound very authoritative but i know them to be just opinion and not based on fact, also offensive to me and other parents who are willing participants. We are not daft and all love the bones of our babies. Im just trying to do the best for my son.

Just read the first couple of posts so far, but that research doesn't sound very ethical to me either.

shensmum - so were the allergies discovered before you started weaning?

Er absolutely not. I have read a European review of studies that recommends wheat before seven months and the inclusion of protein rather than mushed carrots etc but i would never expose a three/four/five month old to anything but breastmilk. (unless the five month old had lost tongue thrust reflex, was sitting unaided and could put a piece of sweet potato in their mouth and swallow it yadda yadda yadda)

I was asked to do this, and was very interested, however I plan to do BLW for a whole bunch of reasons and didn't want to risk ending up in the early weaning group and be spoon feeding him baby rice at 3 months. He's just hit 3 months now and there is no way I feel he is ready for any kind of solids.

"cinnamongreyhound Tue 26-Oct-10 20:50:03

My main issue is weaning at all before 6 months, the lady I spoke to on the phone said 'most people are giving baby rice by 4 months anyway' "

This is very very worrying to me. I wonder whether the lady on the phone was one of the researchers, what qualifications she had, whether she was reading from a script etc etc? I have no idea whether her statement that most people are giving baby rice by 4 months is true or not (wouldn't be surprised to hear that it is though).

My problem with it is that she is brushing aside current WHO and NHS advice, the implication being that you'd have to be a bit of a weirdo to wait until 6 months to wean. Maybe she was trying to say that their sample group introducing foods early would have been weaning at 17 weeks anyway, but this statement was made to someone who said she wouldn't have considered weaning until 6 months.

IMO if this is an ethical study, then they should explain the current advice and reasons behind it, and if someone expressed concern at weaning before 6 months then they should either be in the control group who EBF until 6 months, or they should immediately stop being encouraged to be in the study.

Any thoughts?

the current average weaning age is 3.8months.
probably the point of saying this is to indicate it is not dangerous.

there have already been studies showing no link between weaning age and allergies, this is part of the 'further study' recommeneded as a result. seehere - the picture is far from clear!

the study that the WHO based its allergy advice on was very flawed - i believe they cite an american study where only infants with a family history of allergies were surveyed - the study ran for 1 year only so some of 'late weaned' group had still not been given foods at the end of the study - causing peer-reviewers to say that it only showed that if an allergic baby is given food sooner, it becomes allergic sooner - something you wouldn't need a study to show you! Certainly as the group were all at an increased risk of allergies, the results could not be applied to the general population.

That would have been nice RJandA but they told me it is totally random. Every mum but 1 that I know weaned their baby at or before 20 weeks, stating their baby was too hungry to be just one milk/wanting them to sleep through, so from my experience most people do wean by 17 weeks but that doesn't mean I want to. From the extra info I have received they do state why the recommended age is 26 weeks and give their reasons why they believe that this may not be the best guidance.

I have also had a call from one of the researchers which I miss and haven't got around to returning but I feel that they are very supportive to those taking part. You also have the opportunity to withdraw at any point giving no reason what so ever, although you never know how much pressure will be placed on you at the time you do decide to withdraw!

Thanks for the link EdgarAirbomb, this article is from 2004, I wonder if there has been any research since? It's a shame that in the study of 642 children from Kent, it says only 30% were BF exclusively for 2 months - it doesn't say if there was a control group who were EBF for 6 months.

Also I think the golden 6 months is about more than just allergies - isn't it also to do with gastro infections and digestion problems? Anyway, I'm not trying to preach to others about when to wean, just worried about the ethics of a researcher trying to convince someone to wean earlier than they want to instead of drawing their sample from a group who would have introduced foods at that age anyway.

Where did you get the average weaning age of 3.8 months from? I'm not saying I don't believe you (I do!!), just interested. Also I didn't know that about the WHO study - do you have a source? I'd be interested to read more.

Thanks

At the initial visit when we were randomized into the early weaning group my son had skin prick tests to see if he was sensitive to the allergic foods...these being egg, milk, sesame, fish, peanuts and wheat. Henry had big reactions to milk and eggs. He subsequently had food challenges to eggs and milk which unfortunately confirmed he already had these allergies. Hard to understand how as he had never been exposed to these foods as was still EBF. He had been eating peanuts successfully until he turned 1 then after a bout of illness had developed an allergy to them. I think he's always been allergic to peas and beans etc but it took me a while to click and the EAT team confirmed this at his 1 year check.
In response to the last post...the researchers do not try and convince us to do anything. They have simply explained the research. All risks are clearly outlined and we've been able to make informed decisions every step of the way. I've actually learnt so much regarding current research and best advice...
I have no issues regards the ethics of this study. I think it's fab!

..there have been other studies published since, the one i critiqued in my post was in 2005..

that 3.8 months was linked to on mumsnet somewhere......

Really considering doing this with DS(7 weeks).

Just one question - DD (2.2) is allergic to peanut, egg and sesame so we don't have them in the house. if we were randomised into the early weaning group, how difficult do you think it would be to keep her separate?

Also, were there many appointments as I have 2 other DC and little/no family help.

If you exclude the foods from your house you might not be eligible for the study.
If randomized into the control group I believe you will go at 3ish months, 1 year and 3 years.
We are in the early introduction group and have so far been down for the 3 month check...then 2 food challenges...then the 1 year check...2 more food challenges and we are going again in February for another food challenge. My son is super allergic to load. My daughter who is 3.5 eats everything my lad can't have and we've never had a problem.

I've been to enrol my son on the EAT study yesterday and the experience is hugely positive. They were wonderful with him and answered any questions myself or my husband had, which were few because (if you read the material!) it was all very well explained.

I'm angered that people think it is unethical to take part in this and I wonder how these people expect progress to be made regarding allergies?? Like any mother I wouldn't put my son at risk and the whole process is well supervised and structured. As with all medical research it has had rigorous ethical approcal. The whole process goes along with bf and I can use my expressed milk to make the purees. And when they took a tiny blood sample my son didn't even flinch, never mind cry.

Friends who have children the same age are planning to wean their babies around the same time and I feel lucky that I've got a really good structure to follow. Obviously if you don't want to take part then you don't have to! I'm really pleased the we are taking part in the study that hopes to benefit the 1 in 16 children that have allergies that affect their every day life.

We've just made an appt to enrol our DS in this study at the beginning of March. There are no history of food allergies in our family, but one of the reasons I thought this study so worthwhile is because DS will be in the best place and under the best care if he does have an allergy to any of the foods.

I also wanted to try to help make a difference for all the bubbas that do have food allergies.

Thanks Shensmum and gemnems for sharing your experiences - I was comfortable with the idea anyway, but now even more so.

Just to say don't forget 50% of the participants are in the control arm of this study. So myself and my daughter were just required to follow the WHO guidelines, we BF for 6 months and avoided the allergenic foods. Also this is not a BF vs weaning study. This is about the timing of allergenic foods and the affect on allergies/eczema/asthma etc

Ads x
Annabel 01/06/2010

minimum 17 weeks.

although the millenium cohort showed little relevance in weaning age to frequency of gastro-intestinal troubles. Breastfeeding at all was what made the difference.
someone linkd to it on the other thread ages ago....

faffs with search function

ah.. the other thread

takes me back...

I have also decided to take part in this study and can't praise the team at St Thomas' highly enough. As it happens we are in the control group, weaning as usual at 6 months, but I was happy to be in the early introduction group if necessary.

Last week we attended our 3 month visit. Again, very positive experience.

Why do it? Because allergies plague so many families and if I can help in any way, I will do so.

I don't think it's necessarily the weaning that is causing the probs. Culprit might be the increasingly medicalised nature of infancy - multiple vaccines, early paracetamol/ibuprofen, anitbios etc - compromising the immune system and making our wee ones vulnerable and having gut issues early on. I agree the topic needs researching but not reassured by the method or the considerations.

It's been a while since I checked in on here, am glad to see some parents enrolling in the study and I am delighted if my family's experiences have helped reassure you.
Living with my sons allergies is hard, but not the nightmare I imagined it to be...although I am surprised at the lack of knowledge from our local health care providers...
My son had his 2 year review with the health visitor last week. She was uncomfortable with his limited diet...he's allergic to eggs, milk, fish, legumes and nuts...she asked if he liked scrambled eggs...I confirmed that I don't know as he is allergic to eggs...hmmmmm, she mused, what if you boil it?!!?!?!
Oh.....my.....goodness!

I am considering whether to take part in this too and the comments made by those actually involved are very encouraging. My brother had a severe childhood allergy to eggs and has a lifelong one to peanuts. A friend at uni died in a restaurant after accidentally eating a bit of peanut. All my friends with allergic children have breastfed them and weaned them at 6 months but that made no difference. Paranoid maybe, but have introduced my 3 children to these types of foods near an A&E dept! All mine were formula fed by 3 months and have no allergies at all. Baby number 4 is exclusively breastfed so would be eligible for this study. The dramatic effects of allergy actually make me feel like taking part in this study if it might help make better guidelines for introducing foods which might improve allergy rates. The fact that the babies on the study are tested and monitored is a big incentive for me. I think BF is much more important than weaning age re food and infection - having known a few babies weaned at 3 months but whose are also BF - who are robust little farm kids...

Anyway not sure what I'll do yet but certainly don't think the study is unethical at all. Early weaning has NOTHING to do with ethics. And is as much to do with trends based on such studies anyway. And for the mums who have enrolled in this study - good on you and I hope it goes well...maybe see you there!

By the way - I think rigidly sticking to general guidelines is a bit odd. I weaned my other 3 at around 5/6 months because they were so frantic to tuck into the food on the table. And DD2 was weaned by DD1 under the table with a pot of chocolate mousse just before 5 months. She came crawling out with a face covered in chocolate and hasn't looked back. Although actually doesn't like chocolate unless it's in a cake. Healthy, healthy, healthy!