English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

see I know doc's are right (most of the time) but it would be nice to know if other moms gave fish to their babies at 6 1/2 months, pureed obviously.

2006-07-04 22:43:05 · 12 answers · asked by noogney 4 in Pregnancy & Parenting Newborn & Baby

I realize that anonymous strangers answer here - but some are bona fide experienced mom - my baby's doc doesnt have kids of her own?!!!!

2006-07-05 00:48:26 · update #1

12 answers

Hi, I have never served my kids fish until they could chew (then i gave them fish stix. :o) )

But if your Pediatrician says it is okay to give puree'd fish to your kid, then I'd go for it.

GOOD THING: Fish contain a lot of omega3 fatty acids, which are of excellent nutritional value.
BAD THING: Many types of fish contain levels of Mercury that are not safe for babies. That is why pregnant women are advised to watch their seafood intake.

Here is a website that shows some fish to be cautious of, and which ones are the safest. It is geared toward pregnant women, but in my opinion, if you shouldn't eat it while pregnant, it's best to not let your young baby consume it directly.

BTW, The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which regulates commercially sold fish, recommends that pregnant and nursing women and young children not eat any shark, swordfish, tilefish, or king mackerel, but then recommends 12 ounces per week of any other fish.

Hope this helps.

2006-07-05 04:42:09 · answer #1 · answered by momof2kiddos 4 · 4 2

It is better to start with chicken. My daughter had enzema (I suppose it could also be due to the fact that I gave her fish). There after, docs told me not to give seafood including fish and eggs till 1.

I think recomended age for fish should be 9 months.

2006-07-04 23:25:24 · answer #2 · answered by Sheila 3 · 0 0

Yes, of course. Salmon in particular contains amino acids that the babies need for brain development. I wouldn't give a baby tuna, shellfish or swordfish due to the threat of mercury, but other than that, fish is a much better choice than beef, pork or non-organic chicken.

2006-07-04 22:58:47 · answer #3 · answered by baggyk 3 · 0 0

Yes, I gave my sone fish at about 6 mos. And surely you'd be wiser trusting the opinion of your doctor than coming on here and asking anonymous strangers something about your child's health and safety?

2006-07-04 22:48:38 · answer #4 · answered by Bad Liberal 7 · 0 0

I gave my son fish at this age, just poached white fish, like cod.

I would wait a good while before you introduce other seafood though, as allergic reactions to shellfish etc.. are much more common than to regular old fish.

2006-07-04 22:51:44 · answer #5 · answered by HP 5 · 0 0

Look hear who do you trust morre a doctor with all kinds of degrees or a bunch of dumbass kids and people with nothing better to do? Give the girl some fish.

2006-07-04 22:48:23 · answer #6 · answered by whitetrashwithmoney 5 · 0 0

You might want to look up online about Mercury in fish and warnings about pregnant women and babies eatting it. I hope this helps.

2006-07-04 23:27:43 · answer #7 · answered by sisterren11492 2 · 0 0

Yes, fish is very good for her, I began giving my son when he was 6 months.

2006-07-05 01:32:05 · answer #8 · answered by daisy 6 · 0 0

Better if you can feed him gerber, a bottled food for baby with different flavor,from fruit,vegetables and chicken!Or you can have grinded mongo beans or any beans with grinded anchovis!That has a lot of protein!

2006-07-04 22:48:24 · answer #9 · answered by tutax 4 · 0 0

My daughter ate tiny pieces of almost anything I ate at 6 months old.

2006-07-05 02:01:19 · answer #10 · answered by KathyS 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers