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!

I think the most sensible advice I heard was ‘food before one is just for fun - but food after 1 isn’t, so make sure you use that 6 months wisely’.

I agree it helps people feel less worried when their 10 month old doesn’t eat much (this was me). She really wasn’t interested in food, until after she was 1 actually. I offered her all sorts but she just didn’t get it. She is under the care of a dietician for a different reason, and every time I mentioned that she didn’t eat much, before she was 1, they really weren’t worried as long as she was still having milk.

I think the point is, you’ve got around 6 months to go from nothing to eating 3 meals a day, so don’t panic if they’re still just licking stuff a few weeks in. It doesn’t mean don’t offer them anything, offer stuff but don’t panic if they don’t eat much.

It’s great if your child does eat substantial meals at 8 months, but it’s also fine if they don’t.

Hmmmm DD dietician and the NCT weaning coach both told me this. The main source of nutrition for babies is breast or formula milk until one - food is about teaching baby about textures and different tastes. Obviously the intention is to build up meal sizes and build up to three meals a day but it's not some nonsense made up on Mumsnet. It's current advice from the reputable sources I've checked with

To clarify though, they both advocated feeding well balanced, nutritious foods - we do a mix of baby led and traditional and things like baby crisps and chicken nuggets don't feature .....

I think it is because they can get everything they need from milk - weaning should be just about introducing them to food not getting them to eat lots. I mean there's not really many calories in steamed carrots is there? My eldest wasn't interested in food til about 10 months and even then not much. Some of the older Health Visitors seemed to think he should be on 3 square meals a day at 6 months!!

@modgepodge - but make sure you use those 6 months wisely how? I mean you can offer them food but not much else you can do, really.

@Crimblecrumble1990 - I would say it is entirely normal for them not to eat anything for the first month or two. I don't think you did anything wrong. And it doesn't really matter as their nutrition comes from their milk.

[quote UndertheCedartree]@modgepodge - but make sure you use those 6 months wisely how? I mean you can offer them food but not much else you can do, really.[/quote]
I think it's about trying different textures and flavours - offering finger foods and drinking from a cup etc. I think it also helps so much if they have teeth

I thought it was that their iron store starts running out by 6 months this start giving food.!

@zaffa - mine had teeth at 4 months but the eldest still wasn't interested in food much before 1! So far he has always been much more adventurous with food than his younger DS who was interested in food at a younger age. So personally with hindsight I don't think it makes a blind bit of difference what you do with those 6 months!

The weaning class at the local sure start center did say this, but like some others made it clear that it was equally a transition period. She also spoke really clearly about blw and purees - that most people did a mix of both (liquidise some veg but have sticks of toast to dip/feed him porridge but let him pick up blueberries from a plate, etc.) She was also really helpful when talking about how to introduce different tastes as well, and why babies like shop purees (mostly water!)

Her best tip though was to buy a shower curtain for the mess!

My first baby was only 4 months old but such a hungry horace he was having bottle after bottle. At the baby weight clinic I was told he needed to be weaned onto solids early. So I did. His weight levelled out and he was fine. But now he's a ridiculously fussy eater. My next two babies were breastfed. I did mostly blw, but my middle child virtually refused any type of solids till he was over 12 months. He is perfect in every way and eats all types of food. Third child loved blw and grabbed anything she could get her hands on but most of it was spat out. I would say she didn't eat properly until she was 1. Again though she's fine and eats anything. So I do think there is truth in the phrase, and I will add it is something that was batted about when mine were babies.

I think the point is, you’ve got around 6 months to go from nothing to eating 3 meals a day, so don’t panic if they’re still just licking stuff a few weeks in. It doesn’t mean don’t offer them anything, offer stuff but don’t panic if they don’t eat much
That's how I understood it.

There's a transition for babies so there's no point trying to have a food battle (I'm thinking "one more mouthful for daddy... that's it eat 3 more spoons for mummy... look at the aeroplane" and other behaviours that seem a bit unhealthy to me).
Babies are quite good at self-regulating so as long as they are being exposed to a range of food and textures, who actually cares how parents do it?

[quote UndertheCedartree]@modgepodge - but make sure you use those 6 months wisely how? I mean you can offer them food but not much else you can do, really.[/quote]
I think that’s exactly it. Make sure you offer lots of different foods in all different guises - not just finger foods, not just purées. Rather than spending 6 months going ‘it’s fine, they only need milk’ and using it As an excuse to not offer food, and then getting to 1 year and expecting them to sit down to 3 meals straight away at that point. It’s about a gradual build up I think.

@zaffa teeth make very little difference, please don't give that 'advice' to new mums.

The friend I mentioned in my previous post was told that and refused to even try anything other than stage 1 purées until her baby had teeth... when the first appeared at 16 months she was too scared to try anything else and the baby wasn't able to have even mildly lumpy purées.

Meanwhile, my dc2 was happily eating everything with no teeth- apples, meats, corn on the cob- no issues.

My nearly 8 month old has no teeth and deals with soft lumps (lumps of veg, pasta, scrambled eggs etc) very well

[quote majesticallyawkward]@zaffa teeth make very little difference, please don't give that 'advice' to new mums.

The friend I mentioned in my previous post was told that and refused to even try anything other than stage 1 purées until her baby had teeth... when the first appeared at 16 months she was too scared to try anything else and the baby wasn't able to have even mildly lumpy purées.

Meanwhile, my dc2 was happily eating everything with no teeth- apples, meats, corn on the cob- no issues. [/quote]
What advice? I simply said that I think it helps if they have teeth (with getting used to different textures) not that you shouldn't wean your baby until they have teeth? My baby had two teeth when we started weaning and now has eight - she's always been enthusiastic but has gotten better at biting with more teeth. This means that I can hand her bigger bits of food so she can break them down in her mouth, she can gnaw on food that she couldn't do as easily before, so her palate expands because she enjoys a wider range of food than she did in the beginning. That doesn't mean that I didn't give her anything but purées until she had lots of teeth, just that she wasn't as confident on gnawing on a large bit of meat until she had teeth to pull it apart to smaller chunks.

It doesn't mean that you don't try to give them different textures and tastes, just that you understand that they may take longer to get the hang of it?

@zaffa I mean it doesn't help, or add any benefit 'that they have teeth'. A baby with no teeth has no disadvantage unless the mother has been told teeth 'help' so avoids lumpy or firmer foods.

I don't mind it. It's helped me not be bothered if most of the food ends up everywhere but in their mouths.

[quote majesticallyawkward]@zaffa I mean it doesn't help, or add any benefit 'that they have teeth'. A baby with no teeth has no disadvantage unless the mother has been told teeth 'help' so avoids lumpy or firmer foods. [/quote]
I think my baby did better with weaning once she had more teeth, I think she did very well before but she improved a lot once she could bite chunks out of things. But we did baby led so I've never given her puréed anything. I don't think it's wrong to share my experience, like you are sharing yours?

I appreciate your experience is different and I can't understand how anyone can read 'having teeth might help with getting used to harder or tougher textures' to mean that you should only feed your baby purées. I think that is probably the result of not doing proper research - there's a difference between learning how to wean your baby properly and then anecdotal conversations amongst parents who are already doing so and comparing how their child is doing with more textured food, for example.

I cannot imagine a circumstance where anyone who is qualified would tell a mother weaning their baby that until their baby has teeth to only feed purées and I would be surprised if any reputable source even on google is saying the same?

Food before one is far from fun but a crucial moment that will shape the taste and eating habits of a child.
There is a very narrow window during which a child is open to new taste and it is important to take advantage of it.

@LeGrandBleu - well, it certainly wasn't the case for my 2. My eldest who eats anything and everything barely ate a thing before 1. My fussy youngest was tucking in at 6 months. They get lots of tastes of different things through the breast milk anyway. Really don't think there's any panic! As they get older they tend to start trying new things anyway

The main source of nutrition for babies is breast or formula milk until one - food is about teaching baby about textures and different tastes.

But there’s a huge difference between saying food is just for fun and mainly for fun. Every professional I’ve met has been clear that it’s the latter.

My EBF baby was slow to start eating and needed iron supplementation. Exposure to small amounts of different foods is also beneficial for reducing the likelihood of allergies, as well as being an important window for exploring textures, tastes etc.

Of course it’s not true, they need proper iron intake after six months for a start

Milk makes up the bulk of their calories and nutrition until around 1 yes, my dd2 was around 9 months before she really accepted food so I was told this and not to worry. No such thing as blw then, we just called it food and was a mixture of parents spooning food and bits like banana and rusk to eat themselves,

I breastfed on demand and she fed through the night until 18 months but was asking less in the day by a year