"It is important they experience all five food groups and experiment with variety as much as possible. If half of it finishes on the floor, so be it - the value of experimentation in the early months of nutrition is incalculable and babies won’t willingly starve themselves. If this also has the advantage of reducing unhealthy weight gain and avoiding obesity, it’s a win-win for mums.”So mums after you've cleaned up the mess (win-win?) does one of you want to explain to Tam misogynist Fry why wasting 50% of the food is a bad idea? Maybe the taxpayer funded WRAP campaign LoveFoodHateWaste might give him a clue? Two taxpayer funded bodies offering seemingly opposing attitudes towards a given subject. We could save ourselves a whole load of money by having neither ........ Anyway, back to the article where
The sample included 92 children who had been weaned on finger foods and 63 who were traditionally spoon-fed.I was thinking why is the 'finger food' group 50% larger than the weaned group? Is one type of parent more likely to respond to this kind of survey than another? And then I read a bit of the study. Each group was recruited using different methods; one from adverts on the internet and one hand picked by the researchers which will have a bearing on the attitude of the person completing the study. Which isn't about kids eating and weight but about the parent's attitude towards their children's eating habits
Parents filled in questionnaires on how their children had been weaned, including how often they ate certain foods, when they were aged six months and six years.I can't remember what my kids ate a month ago, let alone when they were six months old so I might guess a little to make myself look and feel good
They noted their child’s preference for 151 foods broken down into categories such as carbohydrates, proteins, fruit, savoury snacks, dairy and “whole meals” such as lasagne.I, as a parent, have to guess whether my 6 month old child likes fruit more than bread so that some busybody cunt can get in the media telling me that I've made my kids fat? No thanks. Especially as the study has this to say about baby-led feeding
The baby-led approach was, however, associated with a higher incidence of underweight relative to the spoon-fed group."a higher incidence of underweight" may lead to a higher incidence of other developmental issues. Tam doesn't mention this rather crucial part of the discussion from the paper. Instead, if you remember from above, he calls it "reducing unhealthy weight gain".
The Mirror leaves the best statistic until the end though.
Nearly all - 94% - of youngsters had never choked as a result of being given solid foods.6.5% of parents reported that their progeny had choked on solid foods. SIX AND A HALF PERCENT! Normally we're told that chiiiildren can't be exposed to that amount of risk! Tam Fry is clearly a menace as he's advocating dangerous practices that could leave your child malnutritioned or, in some cases, dead.