Ever wonder why we are told to start baby on cereal first or how it became our first food of choice for baby?
A Brief History
I recently mentioned a non-traditional book on introducing solids called Baby-led Weaning. The author, Gill Rapley, pioneered baby-led weaning in the U.K. and she has worked as a nurse, midwife and breastfeeding counselor. She gives us a look at how the idea of introducing cereal first may have originated:
In the early 1900’s babies had only breast milk- either from their own mother or from a wet-nurse (a woman employed by the parents to breastfeed their baby) for about eight to nine months or longer. Recommended first foods were usually mutton or beef broth, fed by spoon. Although breastfeeding was recognized as the best way to feed babies, the fact that they need to feed frequently in order for their mother’s to produce enough milk was not understood. Mothers were encouraged to follow strict timetables, limiting the time the baby spent at the breast and spacing feeds several hours apart. As a result, many failed to produce enough milk and babies failed to thrive. No surprise, then, that the few substitute milks available at the time began to grow in popularity. Babies fed on these formulas frequently got sick or were under-nourished. Because of the regimented breast feeding schedules, doctors mistakenly assumed that mother’s breast milk was no longer enough for babies by the time they reached two to four months of age. Chubbiness was seen as a sign of good health and mothers were urged to ‘fatten up’ their babies, so most first foods were cereal-based, with porridge and rusks being particularly popular.
We now have a much better understanding of how breast milk is produced and a large range of vitamin-fortified formula substitutes for moms who are unable to breastfeed. And yet even with fresh, whole foods widely available, we are still encouraged to start cereal first.
With my second son, I started to suspect this was not a good choice for my baby and my own experience has confirmed it. I believe starting with cereal sets our children up for a love of processed grains, such as those found in crackers. With processed foods so readily available for our consumption it’s tough to raise a child that enjoys good natural foods that are closest to their original state.
Is the introduction to solids really about making sure baby gets enough nutrition?
The introduction to solid foods during the first year really shouldn’t be about about the nutrient content of your baby’s foods. The goal here is to allow breast milk to serve this role by providing plenty of nutrition. Instead, solid foods should serve as a way to introduce your baby to textures, smells and tastes of healthy foods. This cannot be done successfully when cereal is the only food they’re eating.
Think about it
- Why not let babies indicate to us when they’re ready to start working with solids?
- Why not just skip tasteless cereal mush completely and start them directly on the foods we’re enjoying?
- Can you imagine a world filled with all the wonderful textures, flavors and aromas of food from the start?
The answer to all of those questions was a resounding YES for me. Now the dietary goals for my family are to eat real food: vegetables, meats, fruits, nuts, dairy and unprocessed grains. Baby-led feeding was a perfect choice for us.
In Part Two of Why Not to Introduce Cereal First, we’ll talk about the problems with the food allergy theory.
>> Read “Why Not to Introduce Cereal First: Part Two” here.
P.S. We’re gearing up to teach you exactly how to introduce solids using our baby-led feeding concept – so get ready for loads of great articles, recipes, tutorials and videos 
Comments on this entry are closed.