Food is fun until they're one

[MrsSchrute]

I keep seeing this on multiple threads, but it's not true is it? Children need food after 6 months, both nutritionally and developmentally.
Where did it come from? I've searched, and can't find anything to back it up!

Its not true. It seems to be something the BLW fanatics chant.

I don’t think it’s true either.

its just to try and help parents stop stressing out when their 8 month old refuses to eat something.

To stop them cajoling/cajoling/bribing/whatever to eat "One more spoonful/the last chip/ two more bites"

To stop them thinking that their 6 month old should be eating three full meals a day..

etc

I can see how it might be used to help anxious parents but I think the pendulum might have swung too far the other way.

Food should be fun (whatever age) but not just for fun. It also serves an important nutritional purpose. I fear that message may have been lost but I accept it's hard to strike a balance in public health messaging.

They need food, but you don't need to stress and force it. Left to explore and try a wide variety of foods, most children will start to eat them. But most of their nutrients and calories still come from milk until around 1. I think the problem is that many parents feel pressured to get food into their babies at the cost of exploration and learning to enjoy lots of new foods. But it doesn't have to be that way, assuming all else is fine and you have a baby who is able to eat and try feeding themselves and is happy to have milk feeds, etc.

But most of their nutrients and calories still come from milk until around 1.

Do you mind me asking where you got that from? I thought that, from 6 months onwards, milk is no longer sufficient to meet a child's nutritional needs?

DD's dietitian said this was bullshit.

@MrsSchrute

But most of their nutrients and calories still come from milk until around 1.

Do you mind me asking where you got that from? I thought that, from 6 months onwards, milk is no longer sufficient to meet a child's nutritional needs?

It's not sufficient to meet ALL their needs, but it does still meet most of them. Hence people saying most of their required calories come from milk.

It's true to a degree. A baby can get everything they need from milk until 12 months. If BF, you need to add supplements (iron and vitamins) after around 5-6 months as the mother's supplies start to be depleted. Formula has this added anyway.

That said, weaning from 6 months is good for lots of reasons: development of mouth muscles which in turn help speech development, acceptance of new tastes and textures, development of various motor skills etc.

However, there is no need to stress if your baby doesn't eat masses of solids at first as they will not be malnourished if they are continuing on feed mainly on milk.

@MrsSchrute

But most of their nutrients and calories still come from milk until around 1.

Do you mind me asking where you got that from? I thought that, from 6 months onwards, milk is no longer sufficient to meet a child's nutritional needs?

Most is not all. It’s possible for both these statements to be true.

To be honest, this phrase stresses me out a bit. Solids 'clicked' with my 9 month old a few weeks ago and since then he's been insatiable. He's refusing breastfeeds in favour of solids and I'm worried he's not taking enough milk any more I can hardly force him to breastfeed though!

@SpikeDearheart

To be honest, this phrase stresses me out a bit. Solids 'clicked' with my 9 month old a few weeks ago and since then he's been insatiable. He's refusing breastfeeds in favour of solids and I'm worried he's not taking enough milk any more I can hardly force him to breastfeed though!

Milk is nutritious^^ enough, but if they are getting their nutrients from solids, then that's fine too. It doesn't mean that they should get must of their nutrients from milk until 12 months - just means that they can do so and not to stress if they don't want solids. The same is true in reverse. If they are eating a good balanced diet of solids - that's great.

I think it’s a phrase to try and help parents calm down about weaning, which is daunting when you start. I found it comforting when I heard it. Saying that, I now have an 11-month-old who refuses all formula except about 3 or 4 ounces in the morning, so her three meals a day are vital and I’m trying to cover the nutritional bases as well as giving a vitamin supplement.

Perhaps there is a risk of some parents not bothering with weaning if they hear the phrase - I’m not too sure.

It's bollocks. Yep, absolutely no need to stress out if 8m old Jimmy won't finish his dinner or 10m old Bob won't eat his breakfast but they do need food from 6/7m ish. There is not sufficient nutrition in milk alone (breast or formula) for optimism growth or development after that age, roughly.

It's usually used by those who think BF and BLW is some sort of religion. The one woman I know who used to chant it ferociously at anyone worried about their baby not eating ended up with an anaemic child due to her insistence that it didn't matter if he didn't eat well or really anything at all because he was breastfed (child was well over 12m by this point!).

In reality, it's just a balance that's needed, gradual cut down of milk in favour of food until one replaces the other, with milk being a nutritious drink to have alongside food sometimes.

I agree it's crap, it's also misleading. A balanced diet is important from the start and saying food is 'for fun' implies what a baby eats isn't important when it is essential to give a balanced diet.
Iron stores are depleted by around 6 months, babies also have requirements for all other nutrients we need and while some is provided in milk- be that formula or breast milk- they also need some to come from solids.

Developmentally, the skills they learn and master while learning to eat also helps speech, coordination, motor skills and many other areas of development- the pincer grip is a good one a lot babies will learn from eating.

The BLW fanatics take it to the extreme, although I do see definite advantages to BLW in terms of ease, avoiding fussiness, encouraging self feeding and mastering biting and chewing.

I have a friend who still exclusively feeds her 18 mo stage 1 purées, the dc is entirely spoon fed, can't handle anything with lumps (after a year of smooth mush it's understandable), makes fewer distinct sounds than my 11mo and has less refined fine motor skills. All things at least linked to weaning/eating, eg. my 11mo learned pincer grip chasing peas around his plate and his hand eye coordination developed a lot with weaning (read: shovelling food into his mouth).

The amount of food a baby eats is negligible in terms of calories and most of their calories will still come from milk. If your child eat very little actual food it is not a problem until they are 1 when they become much more active and therefore need more calories.
Baby milk if fortified with vitamins.

@happylittlechick I’m pretty sure mine were all getting a large amount of calories from food by 8 months as they were having three substantial meals.

I’ve only ever heard the food is for fun before one on here and Facebook groups. I work with mums and babies and have never heard this advice being given by a health professional.

My nearly 8 month old is getting a fair whack of his calories from the 3 meals he has a day

@MrsSchrute

I keep seeing this on multiple threads, but it's not true is it? Children need food after 6 months, both nutritionally and developmentally. Where did it come from? I've searched, and can't find anything to back it up!

It’s not true if the baby is breastfed or only given minimal formula. But it could be true for babies on the upper centiles who drink loads of formula milk as it’s fortified with nutrients so you can go slow with weaning.

As for blw - a lot of people don’t understand it and think it’s just about babies feeding themselves finger foods. It’s not. It’s about babies feeding themselves - it’s perfectly ok to start them on porridge and weetabix and let them go at it. You just have to keep giving them more until you’re satisfied they’ve had enough (and try not to have a heart attack at the mess!). In the early days I needed to give double portions to account for the mess.

Thanks, that's really reassuring! It really feels like you can't win - welcome to parenthood, I suppose

Haaaa I haven’t heard this in a while! Neither of my babies took much food until well after 1 - both healthy babies (now 6 and 3) - but I was very envious at the time of the parents who could offer actual food and have it eaten, not chucked on the floor or ignored.

It's usually a well meaning phrase to reassure parents who've chosen not to go onto very regulated meals. It can be both irritating and demoralizing when the competitive types do the silly head tilt and declare their DC is fed to military schedule and at 7 months is already eating full gourmet meals because they don't know how anyone could feed their child beans.

Prior to 1 they just need a mixture of milk and food. Most people do their best and some think their baby's eating habits are a measure of their worth as a mother.

It's an absolutely stupid mantra and gives off the wrong message.

You need to set in the ground work when weaning. Sitting at a table and being offered 3 meals a day. Giving baby a wide range of real food and teaching them how to self feed.
I've seen so many mums follow that stupid food for fun mantra, and instead of giving their child proper food and sitting and eating with them, they just give them crap baby products like those crisp things, then wonder why they won't eat a proper dinner when they are one.

In my experience babies are the least fussy eaters - most of them will eat dirt given the chance - so you introduce food while they're still young enough to not turn their nose up at it. Then when they become a fussy toddler they're more likely to eat a wide range of food.

It is a silly phrase but my DC genuinely wouldn’t eat much food until well after one.

I discussed it with GP/HV and no one was concerned. We sit at the table at mealtimes, we offered a balanced and wide range of texts and flavours, cooked new things, and kept it relaxed - but some meals were them licking a bit of pasta or throwing all the sandwiches on the floor. DD had a VERY sensitive gag reflex and would throw up at the drop of a hat if anything caught in her mouth. They were perfectly healthy, hitting milestones and did start eating more eventually.

It didn’t seem to be true for mine that they ‘needed’ more food during this time. At 6, my son eats anything - 3yo DD is slightly more fussy but not terribly so.

Hate this phrase.

I did an NCT weaning course, this was their mantra and basically anything other than BLW was rubbish.

I spent the first month giving my baby single food finger foods as instructed and not a single thing was eaten. Will chew literally anything apart from food. He certainly wasn't having 'fun'. I felt like the worst mum in the world until I gave up and ignored it. He's been on homemade textured purées for the last 2 months and is loving it. Means he has tried lots of different flavours and we have discovered he has allergies. He still has the odd finger food to practice with.

If I had stuck to 'before 1 just for fun', I'm pretty sure he still wouldn't have actually eaten a single thing.