Solids

[Erin_25]

Also WRT the food labelling - the only reason some foods state that they are suitable from 4months+ is because they are packaged overseas where the WHO recommendations haven't been adopted. There is no difference between the food that is labelled 4+ months and that labelled 6+ months except for the country where it was packaged. The WHO recommendations are that no solids are introduced before 6 months and the Australian guidelines are the same. This is very confusing for mums who see that on the label and think that some foods are actually ok before 6 months.

All of the Heinz baby food (some of which states from 4months+) is packaged in Echuca, VIC. I know everyone doesn't agree, but again if something shouldn't be used then it wouldn't be available. Or it would have a warning on the packet, which it does for under 4months. Again I wouldn't start before then but if you think they are ready I would stick to only what's available for that age.

__________________
Erin

[MantaRay]

Erin, thanks for that. As I don't buy packaged baby foods I didn't actually know that. However the issue still is that the labelling on the packaging is inconsistent with the medical recommendations for starting solids. There is NO difference between food labelled ok from 4 months, and that labelled from 6 months. Here is a quote from the ABA website:

The Australian Breastfeeding Association recently met with officials and parliamentarians in Canberra to argue that infant food labelling regulations should immediately be revised to reflect the six-month health recommendation. Unfortunately, industry lobbying may undermine Australia's new 'six-month' exclusive breastfeeding guideline, and delay indefinitely any changes to our baby food labelling laws. We were told that Australia might not update our baby food labelling rules, as New Zealand is not amending its public health guidelines to reflect the new evidence. The minimum recommendation in New Zealand is just four months of exclusive breastfeeding. Industry argues that changing Australian labelling laws to reflect the six months recommendation would make our rules inconsistent with New Zealand 'standards'.

Also, we were told, another two years could pass before consumers see a difference in baby food labels on supermarket shelves, unless government regulators can be persuaded they need to invoke special fast-tracking provisions to protect public health.

I knew the labelling was due to NZ standards, but didn't realise that some food is actually packaged here with that labelling.

Starting solids before 6 months is what some people choose to do, and that is ok. I have learnt since having kids that many people do things differently to me, and there are many ways to do things. I have learnt on BB that this is something to be celebrated, not condemned. If we were all the same life would be boring. And sometimes the majority are wrong, sometimes the recommendations are wrong. Personally, I wouldn't start solids before 6 months, but if people do because it seems to be the right thing for them, then so be it - who am I to say it's not the right thing for them. But I do feel it necessary to point out the anomaly with the food labelling, as it is confusing and provides mis-information which might lead someone to make a decision they would not otherwise have made.