Doubling Up

When you're expecting a baby, people always ask you whether you've "got everything". When pregnant second time round, the question then becomes "did you keep everything?".
I've always thought that you don't really need a great deal of stuff when you have a baby (although stuff does accumulate really quickly). Whatever you're missing, you can always get creative...

When we had Gracie, she wouldn't sleep in her cot, so we co-slept. Now, with Ella Mae, we do the same. She has a great cot bed which we intend to use for her naps, but at the moment she isn't keen. Like all babies, she likes cuddles, and finds that far nicer than a cot.

Having a baby that likes to be held most of the time is tricky when you have a 4 year old that also needs you. I have mastered giving Gracie a shower whilst wearing Ella Mae in a sling (babywearing is brilliant - it means you're hands-free). But certain things are easier if baby is in her cot.
Lots of parents have a Moses basket for this. It is small and cosy, and can be carried from room to room. You can also put something in it that smells of you, to comfort baby. However, being a "How much?! You must be bloody joking" kind of girl (yeah, ok, I'm a tightwad) means that a Moses basket / carrycot isn't something I would buy if I could possibly help it.
And so, ladies and gentlemen, I give you the cheapskate's Moses basket - the baby bath.

Seriously. I make it snuggly by putting my dressing gown in there. Works a treat. Now I can keep an eye on her whilst having a shower. And the bath is easy to move about, so I can take it from room to room if required. And yes, it is the bath that belonged to Gracie, we kept it.

I'm incredibly pleased with my discovery - after all, weren't babies kept in bottom drawers in the olden days (absolutely no idea whether that is actually true)? And didn't people bathe their babies in the kitchen sink back in the day (ditto)? It's good to make things multi-purpose - for example, we currently use Gracie's old playpen, now dismantled, to hang our washing. It drives me insane to be honest, but no matter...

I'm sure, with a bit of thought, I could come up with loads of things I don't need because I use something else for that purpose. In fact, I think we all could.
Go on, give it a go. You might surprise yourself.

Cinematic delights

So Gracie and I went to the cinema. Aside from the Parent and Baby screenings that we went to when I was on maternity leave, we've been to the cinema three times now. That's not many times, I grant you, but Gracie tends not to be the sort of toddler that sits still when required.
Our first visit was rather something: a premiere screening of The Croods. Not bad for a first cinematic experience. The only problem with this of course was that, on our second visit, not only did Gracie expect her friend Lily to be there to meet her, she also expected face painting and free snacks...
That aside, the second visit was fine. Because it was Toddler Time, it was £3 for Gracie's ticket. As the accompanying adult, I go free. The film was half an hour long, perfect for her attention span - well, it would have been had they not started the film about 10 minutes early, but you can't win 'em all...
Which brings us to our third, and most recent, visit. A very reasonable £1.75 a ticket meant that I didn't object to paying £3.25 for popcorn, biscuits and a drink for Gracie. To be fair, the cinema did also throw in a couple of free white chocolate buttons. Well, I say "throw in" - Gracie actually just helped herself, and asking her to put them back isn't very hygienic. The film was an hour and a half, so Gracie did well. After three trips though, I can see that she still has a lot to learn about cinema-going:
1. Just because a trailer is more than 30 seconds long, this does not make it a film in its own right.
2. A quiet bit does not necessarily mean that it is the end of the film, especially when you're only a couple of minutes in.
3. Boring bits aren't more interesting if you watch them upside down.
4. Not every film would be improved by the presence of Tinkerbell.
5. Just because a female character is dressed in purple, it doesn't automatically follow that her name is Rapunzel.
I don't know, maybe I'm expecting too much. I guess I'm just going to have to keep on taking her...

UNICEF's response to the nonsense article posted in the BMJ

Dearie me, what a lot of fuss there's been over a particular article in the BMJ, telling us all to wean earlier....Blimey.  Below is a reasonable response to the nonsense, from UNICEF no less....


UNICEF UK response to media reports questioning the recommendation to introduce solid food to babies at 6 months

An article published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) is being reported in the media as questioning whether exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months is appropriate for UK babies (1).  This article is not based on new evidence but rather a re-analysis of older evidence, much of which is the same as that used as the basis for weaning recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the UK’s Departments of Health (DH) (2,3)
When considering this analysis it should be noted that three of the four authors have declared an association with the baby feeding industry. Less breastfeeding and earlier introduction of solid food will lead to greater profit for this industry.
There is a wealth of robust evidence that breastfeeding saves lives and protects both the short and long term health of mothers and babies in industrialised countries. Breastfeeding reduces the risk of infections, as well as the risk of diabetes and obesity in children and breast cancer in mothers. It is also associated with improved parenting capability among low-income women, and with reduced incidence of neglect and postnatal depression, thereby improving the life chances of children(4 5 6 7).
WHO recommended the introduction of solid food at around 6 months alongside continued breastfeeding in 2001. This was based on evidence that the early introduction of solid food to babies increased the risk of infection and disease. In 2003, DH also began to recommend introducing solids at ‘around 6 months’, changing from its previous position of ‘at 4-6 months’. The authors of the BMJ article question this recommendation for UK babies. The basis of their arguments is that delaying introducing solid food may increase the risk of iron deficiency anaemia (IDA), coeliac disease and food allergies, and that introducing new tastes may increase acceptance of green leafy vegetables and so encourage healthy eating later in life.

Iron deficiency anaemia
IDA is strongly influenced by iron stores at birth (which is related to the mother’s iron status and length of gestation) and early cord cutting (which is still common and can reduce iron stores by up to 33%). IDA is also associated with poverty and deprivation. Ensuring that the mother is not anaemic and that cord cutting is delayed will in turn ensure that the baby’s own body stores and breastmilk will provide sufficient iron for over 6 months (8).
 The majority of the food commonly introduced to babies in the early months such as cereal, fruit and vegetables are low in iron and will therefore not help prevent IDA. However, if they are introduced before a baby needs them, they will displace breastmilk from the baby’s diet and may thereby reduce the amount of iron consumed(9).

Coeliac disease
Coeliac disease is associated with the early introduction of gluten (from cereals). There have been a number of observational studies which have suggested that the exact timing of the introduction of gluten into the diet may influence the development of this disease. The Government’s Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition and Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Foods, Consumer Products and the Environment have been asked to analyse the evidence on this issue and its draft statement can be found at: www.sacn.gov.uk/meetings/sub_groups/maternal_child_nutrition/19012011.html
This statement concludes:
Currently available evidence on the timing of introduction of gluten into the infant diet and subsequent risk of coeliac disease and T1DM is insufficient to support recommendations about the appropriate timing of introduction of gluten into the infant diet for either the general population or high-risk sub-populations. However, there is evidence suggesting that not being breastfed at the time when gluten is introduced into the diet is associated with an increased risk of subsequently developing coeliac disease.

Food allergies
The incidence of genuine food allergy (as opposed to food intolerance) is rare (10). There is speculation and some observational data that when there is a family history of true allergy then early introduction of certain foods may be beneficial. Random control trials are now being undertaken to test this theory. Should this prove to be the case (which is by no means certain) then high risk families would need to be advised on a case-by-case basis. This would not affect public policy as applied to the majority of children not affected by allergies.
Introducing bitter tastes
The BMJ paper claims that introducing bitter tastes early will increase the acceptance of green leafy vegetables and so prevent obesity later in life. This is purely speculative.
Breastmilk changes flavour depending on the mother’s diet and so exposes the baby to various tastes from birth onwards. Food preference is also dependant on a number of factors including what is given, how it is given and parental attitude. Current DH recommendations take account of these factors and encourage parents to introduce a range of healthy foods in an appropriate manner (11).

Recommendations
The UNICEF UK Baby Friendly Initiative supports continued research into improving infant health. However, any new research should then be considered as part of the whole body of evidence and any recommendations made should be based on the full evidence rather than on single papers. It is unfortunate that the BMJ press office and the UK media have focused on a single piece of comment which has resulted in sensational headlines and risks misleading parents and damaging infant health.
The DH recommendation is that solid food be introduced at around six months. It is acknowledged that babies’ individual development varies widely and that some babies may be ready for solid food before and after this time. Since the introduction of this recommendation the number of babies experiencing the potentially harmful introduction to solid food before 4 months has reduced.12
Health professionals should continue to support mothers with accurate information based on DH and WHO guidance, helping them to recognise the signs of when their baby may be ready to try new foods, while continuing to breastfeed.

References

1Frewtrell M, Wilson D, Booth I, Lucas A (2011) Six months of exclusive breastfeeding: how good is the evidence? BMJ 2011; 342:c5955 http://www.bmj.com/cgi/doi/10.1136/bmj.c5955
2 World Health Organization (2002), 55th World Health Assembly. Infant and young child nutrition. World Health Organization,(WHA55.25). http://apps.who.int/gb/archive/pdf_files/WHA55/ewha5525.pdf.
3 Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN), Subgroup on Maternal and Child Nutrition (SMCN). Paper for discussion: introduction of solid foods, agenda item: 3. 2003. SMCN/03/08. www.sacn.gov.uk/pdfs/smcn_03_08.pdf.
4 Ip S, et al (2007) Breastfeeding and Maternal Health Outcomes in Developed Countries. AHRQ Publication No. 07-E007. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK38337/
5 Horta B et al (2007) Evidence on the long-term effects of breastfeeding. WHO. http://www.who.int/child_adolescent_health/documents/9241595230/en/index.html
6 Gutman LM, Brown J, Akerman R (2009) Nurturing Parenting Capability: The Early Years. Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits of Learning. http://www.learningbenefits.net/Publications/ResRepIntros/ResRep30intro.htm
7 Strathern L, Mamun AA, Najman JM et al (2009) Does Breastfeeding Protect Against Substantiated Child Abuse and Neglect? A 15-Year Cohort Study. Pediatrics; 123; 483-493. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/123/2/483
8 Dewey K, Chaparro M (2007) Mineral metabolism and body composition Iron status of breast-fed infants. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society (207), 66, 412–422 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17637094
9 Geissler C, Powers H (2007) Human Nutrition, 11th Ed Elsevier


10 http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Allergies/Pages/Foodallergy.aspx
11 Weaning (Department of Health, 2007) http://www.babyfriendly.org.uk/page.asp?page=115&category=10
12 Bolling K, et al (2007) Infant Feeding Survey 2005, Department of Health, London http://www.ic.nhs.uk/pubs/ifs2005