Is this information that doctors are handing out? A deduction women come to on their own?
I've just never understood it. Babies aren't usually taking bites, and the teeth used to chew -- the molars -- don't usually come in until a year or later anyway, so what difference does it make how many (if any) teeth a baby has when considering what to feed them?
And I'm really curious how this misinformation is being spread.
Answer by ObbyDobbie at 10:36 AM on Jan. 31, 2011
Answer by misses_nick at 10:38 AM on Jan. 31, 2011
Answer by Musicmom80 at 10:39 AM on Jan. 31, 2011
Just because your OPINION is different doesn't mean that everyone is being handed "false" information. There is proof to not start feeding solids until later on in an infants life, and proof that you should start early. I was told 4-6 months by quite a few Dr.s. It is suggested that an infant that age be fed pureed foods, so why would they need teeth to eat that to start with. I think each individual parent should feed their child at what age they believe they should. And babies under a year CAN take a "bite" and chew. On the other hand, I didn't go by when any of my children got their teeth. I trust their Dr. and went with what he suggested.
Answer by MrsHouston47302 at 10:43 AM on Jan. 31, 2011
Answer by Candi1024 at 10:51 AM on Jan. 31, 2011
Answer by Bethsunshine at 10:53 AM on Jan. 31, 2011
Answer by mrssundin at 11:15 AM on Jan. 31, 2011
Answer by missanc at 1:14 PM on Jan. 31, 2011
Answer by Krysta622 at 1:43 PM on Jan. 31, 2011