You know the "Food is fun until you're 1"?

[Ozziegirly]

I understand that it comes from the Gill Rapley book, which I haven't read so forgive me my question, but where does she get it from?

I'm just interested as it appears to be so different from the advice that we are given here in Australia, which is to crack on with food, and that babies should be pretty much having 3 meals a day of normal food by the time they are a year old.

I'm not questionning BLW as I think it seems like a great idea, but I just wondered what studies support the mantra really.

I want to know too! I often see it on MM but have never seen any evidence to support it. I have seen research that food is needed from six months which directly contradicts "Food before 1 ..."

I understand it as a gradual thing, that you are building up to 3 meals a day at one where the food takes over from the milk. Not that it changes over night.

I'm doing BLW with dd3 & she has food at three meals a day but isn't taking in enough to call it a meal IYSWIM. I expect by the time she is one that she will be and milk feeds will reduce

That makes sense, but where does the idea actually come from? Presumably she didn't just come up with it, it must be based on some kind of science.

I do like the concept of BLW and we are just starting it with our DD - but the references section of the book is very sparse.
I like the idea that babies get all they need from formula or BM until they are 1 - but i don't think thats the case.

needing solid fun does not directly contradict "food before 1..."

I take from it, to not get majorly stressed about it. Food is a supplement for the first year.

I assume it comes from the fact the HCP say that at 1 they should be having 3 meals a day etc. so that before this time, just build up to it, have fun with it, don't stress over all the tiny details and compare to how much other babies are eating.

FWIW there are cultures where weaning doesn't start until 9 months.