One morning last year I set Mooch (aged 3 months) in her bouncy chair and made Goober (aged 4) toast with peanut butter for breakfast. Then, in a fit of selfish negligence, I ran to the bathroom to take advantage of the rare opportunity to pee all by myself. When I returned 45 seconds or so later the baby was smeared head to toe with peanut butter from the slice of toast she held clenched in her fat little fists. She was chewing on it like a starving dog despite her total lack of teeth.
I'm not the type to take the ever changing recommendations of the so-called experts too seriously, but I did think that rice cereal should probably come before toast with peanut butter on the food introduction schedule so I took it away from her, which wasn't easy and resulted in a tiny baby temper tantrum. Then I congratulated Goober on her effort to share with her new sister, but explained that babies aren't supposed to have peanut butter before they're 2, and also she could choke, and also DON'T FEED HER ANYTHING IF MOMMY'S NOT THERE!
Turns out Goober might have been in the right.
According to this exciting new study, children who's parents do not expose them to peanuts during pregnancy, through breast milk or by mouth before the age of 2 in an effort to protect them from deadly peanut allergies, may actually be 10 times more likely to GET the allergy than children who are exposed to peanuts early.
I never really tried to keep peanuts away from my kids, since no one in my family is allergic and I personally love peanuts, and neither of them is allergic. But what a kick in the pants this would be to a mom who religiously abstained from all things peanut for 3 years, only to find out she may actually have increased her child's odds of having an allergy.
Experts are such assholes.
P.S. my 1 year old also eats wheat, gluten, dairy, eggs, honey and sugar!
in transit the scenery blurs
23 hours ago