Jump to content
This site uses cookies. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. More Info... ×
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

When Do You Introduce Gluten To Baby?


Offthegrid

Recommended Posts

Offthegrid Explorer

This is thinking waaaay ahead, but anyhow. I am dx'd gluten intolerant based on blood test but elected not to have the endoscopy. My brother has it. My aunt has it. I believe my mother (not related to aunt) has it along with other food intolerances but she refuses to be tested.

I am certain my hubby has it, but he had a negative blood test so he refuses to give up gluten even for 2 weeks. So there is a high likelihood that if we have children, they would also be gluten intolerant.

Has anyone just purposely kept their kids off gluten as infants and toddlers? When *would* you do a test of gluten? (By test, I mean giving the kid food with gluten in it and seeing if there is a reaction.)


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



JennyC Enthusiast

Gluten should be introduced between 4-6 months. Some studies suggest that if you introduce gluten too early or too late it will increase the child's likelihood of developing celiac disease. Blood tests are not supposed to be reliable until children are at least 24 months old.

dandelionmom Enthusiast

I've heard between 6 and 9 months. I've also heard that continuing to breastfeed through out the first year (or longer) and especially while introducing gluten can help lessen the incidence of celiac disease.

dionnek Enthusiast

I have a 4 1/2 month old baby that I am strictly breastfeeding right now (I have confirmed celiac and am gluten free), and was planning on waiting until 1 year to introduce gluten (stick with gluten free baby foods for the first year) so as to build up his immunity. I'm confused then why they say you should introduce gluten between 4-6 months (or 6-9)? Since they tell you not to introduce peanuts, etc. until 1 year due to allergies, why introduce gluten before then? Just wondering - I'm a very confused mommy!

Juliet Newbie

I don't know the reason why they say between 4-6 months; from the studies I've read, it's at best a correlation and not causal. They found that fewer kids get full blown Celiac within a certain time frame if they are introduced at this early stage versus later. However, the test has not looked at whether or not these same kids get Celiac Disease later in life.

I introduced my daughter (after my son was diagnosed right when she was born) to gluten during this time. She could not handle it. And later, I gave her small bits, too. She's never been able to digest it well. I also got the gene test done to make sure if I even needed to worry about Celiac Disease with her. She had the gene. So our pediatric g.i. said that if she had the gene and she reacted at all to gluten, she probably will get the disease since our son got sooooo sick at such a young age.

cruelshoes Enthusiast

See this link: Open Original Shared Link

The AAP published a study in the May 18, 2005 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. In it, it was reported that children that are prone to celiac disease have a greater risk of developing celiac disease if gluten in introduced prior to 4 months or after 7 months. These children were followed for an average of 4.8 years.

Here are the findings:

The Findings

Fifty-one children (3.3%) developed evidence of celiac disease. Twenty five of these children had biopsy confirmed cases. Major findings included:

Children exposed to wheat, barley, or rye in the first three months of life had a five-fold increased risk of celiac disease autoimmunity compared to those exposed at 4-6 months. Children not exposed until their seventh month or later were also at increased risk, but only slightly.

Among the 41 children who were at the greatest risk according to their genetic markers, those exposed to wheat, barley, or rye in the first three months of life had nearly an eight-fold increased risk of celiac disease autoimmunity compared to those exposed at four to six months.

No protective effect of breastfeeding was observed.

These findings were consistent even when the researchers limited their analysis to only the 25 cases of biopsy-confirmed celiac disease.

FWIW, we introduced gluten to both of our older kids at 6 months. One developed celiac and one did not. I have also read studies that breastfeeding CAN have a protective effect.

Guhlia Rising Star

What about those of us that have strict gluten free households? How would you go about introducing it then?


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



shan Contributor

There are so many different opinions on this! In one hospital, i was told by 2 different drs, to try at 4-6 months and hte other said only after a year. I gave mine a couple of spoons at approx 6 months, he wasn't happy and now at 13 months i hope to be trying it again. They said there is no way you can prevent it from being 'passed on', nor can you prevent it from happening altogether - neither myself nor my hubby has it, nor anyone that we know (except my step grandma :) ) yet my dd has it... whenever you give gluten to your child will not be the cause of him or her getting celiac! Celkiac is not contagious it is genetic - you either are born with it or not!!!!!

shayesmom Rookie
Has anyone just purposely kept their kids off gluten as infants and toddlers? When *would* you do a test of gluten? (By test, I mean giving the kid food with gluten in it and seeing if there is a reaction.)

Personally, if I were to have a second child, I would ignore the studies and not introduce gluten until my child had his/her molars. Why? It's all part of the ptyalin debate I guess...and to me, it makes sense.

"Ptyalin and Infant Food. It has traditionally been common to start infants on solid food from 4+ months onwards - however current research and WHO/UNICEF "Baby Friendly" guidelines recommend only breastmilk until 6 months of age.

For almost 200 years, medical science has understood that the saliva amylase Ptyalin is a critical enzyme involved in the commencement of starch break-down into glucose. Science has also known, but seemingly forgotten, that infants do not produce normal levels of Ptyalin until full dentition (growth of teeth).

With ptalin absent from infant saliva, two predictable physiological reactions can occur after the consumption of farinaceous (starchy) foods:

The indigestible starch "ferments" within the intestines causing numerous digestive disorders. Mucus "thickens" potentially causing ear, nose or throat problems. NOTE: What of Third World and Asian babies historically being fed rice and other starches? For thousands of years mothers in these continents traditionally chewed their baby's food first, before feeding it to their infant - thus unknowingly coating it with their own saliva ptyalin.

Low levels of ptyalin within infant saliva has been documented for almost 200 years my many doctors, including Chavasse, Sonsino, Tilden, Routh, Huxley, Youmans, Dalton, Page, Densmore, Shelton and Fry. More recently this debate is again resurfacing, such as through author Kathy Fray controversially bringing the topic to the forefront.

Instead of problematic starchy foods such as baby rice, baby cereals, baby porridge, mashed potatoes, bread rusks, crackers, biscuits, pasta and noodles; the recommended alternatives are vegetables and fruit, topped up with a little protein."

kazzadazza Newbie

well done for THINKING about what you might feed your baby before it is here . swedish research ( i think there are others too ) indicate that babies are less likely to develop celiac disease if they are recieving "substantial" quantities of breast milk when they are first exposed to gluten . there is no need to rush into introducing foods other that breastmilk into a babies diet - where possible babies should be exclusively breastfed until 6 months of age . i think that the most important thing to remember is that you don't just need to go -"well today is the day you must start eating , heres a great big heaping bowl of food for you " . i really like what was recomended to me by a nurse with my youngest . "just let them have a little taste of what your eating " so you just stick your (clean ) finger in and let them have a tiny taste of it . it doesn't need to be everyday , at first . its just a way of very gradually introducing your childs body to the concept of foods other that milk . it ok for them to taste everything AS LONG AS THEY ARE OVER 6 MONTHS . when i started introducing solids as an actual substantial part of their diet , i went for raw organinc wholefoods , banana with my first , avocado with my second ; but mixed mostly with breastmilk to begin . and other foods very gradually , after that . i really don't think that grains should be introduced before 10 months . my research has indicated to me that these measures reduce the likeliness of any innapropriate immune responses . anyway you have plenty of time to research and decide what is best for you .

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      129,887
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    BradL
    Newest Member
    BradL
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.3k
    • Total Posts
      1m

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • trents
      First, I hope you know that celiac disease is not an allergy to gluten. It is an autoimmune disease reaction that is triggered by gluten consumption. Allergies don't trigger immunes responses whereby the body attacks it's own tissues but this is what is actually happening with celiac disease and what distinguishes celiac disease from NCGS (Non Celiac Gluten Sensitivity).  Second, though I think your question other question has already been answered. Since the tTG-IGA antibody test is only 90 to 98% specific, elevated values for this test will be have non-celiac disease causes in 2 to 8 out of 100 cases. I realize that is addressing your question in a general way but the non-celiac causes have also be covered in this thread, though not to  the granularity of giving percentages to each non-celiac cause. Not sure why that is important to you at this point. First, you need to separate whether it is due to celiac disease or not. If not, then start sorting out what the other cause is. But as I stated above, by far the most likely cause is celiac disease so that is the place to start. Sure, we get it. Having  to eliminate gluten from your life spells huge culinary and social changes and challenges. But it's still better than facing cancer or host of other diseases that less definitive antidotes and outcomes. With celiac disease you don't even have to worry about taking medications because, as of now at least, there are none. The treatment is very straightforward. Avoid gluten.
    • Shining My Light
      @trents This info is so helpful and I’m absorbing it all. My blood tests were almost a month ago and I feel like it came out of left field. I never even heard of term “silent celiac.” I thought celiac gave you violent diarrhea when you consumed a tiny bit of gluten. That’s it. Not that it damages your small intestine, not that it made the absorption of vitamins and minerals compromised. None of it. To me it was just an allergy to gluten.  My close family and friends think I’m crazy for even giving it a second thought because “no symptoms, no worries.”  It’s unfortunately hard for me to let something go that I don’t know enough about. Therefore all the research came into play.  I’m glad I’ve joined this forum. It’s more helpful to talk things through with people than looking through cases studies without being able to ask questions. I’m on the fence right now on what my odds are. I don’t know enough about the other variables and probability of why a TTG level would be raised.  The questions I still have lingering are:  -what are the odds that these levels are raised in something other than celiac? For instance of all positive TTG tests that have been done how many of those are from celiac? I know it’s a big ask but to me that’s something that is super unclear to me.  - what are the TTG levels in something other than celiac? (I.e. in things like type 1 diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, hepatitis, viruses, NCGS, etc, are the TTG levels the same as those that have celiac, higher or lower?)  - even if it’s not celiac and it’s NCGS, if my body is “responding” to gluten, and creating antibodies to it, wouldn’t that be something to avoid anyway? Maybe not doing the damage but still my body doesn’t like it?  -could I really possibly follow a gluten free life as close as I follow Jesus?  Definitely understand now that key piece of needing an EGD. It’s looking at things from another angle. Also with all the other associated blood work, more angles.  I would like to say please forgive me if any of my questions seem as though I’m trying to be difficult. Making lifelong decisions is hard.  I do have decisions to make as you have said. I clearly will need convinced in order for this to be something to be committed to.  I would hope that there will be something in the future that comes out that will offset gluten in bodies the same was it does for sugar in diabetics.  My compassion is far greater for anyone carrying the burden of celiac than it was a month ago knowing what I know now.  I appreciate you helping me work this out, in real time. It’s been lonely up to this point. Only me talking about what I’ve read to people who don’t think I should be bothering with it any further. 😆 So thank you! 🙏            
    • trents
      Lot's of folks would trade places with you with regard to the unintentional weight loss. Seriously, though, I would be concerned about vitamin and mineral depletion due to malabsorption in the small bowel. One thing you can do now to address that which will not jeopardize the accuracy of further testing for celiac disease would be to start taking some high potency vitamin and mineral supplements. Make sure they are all gluten free if you will continue to use them - after diagnosis, that is. Wheat starch is sometimes used as a filler in pills. A multivitamin may not be potent enough. So, I would go for a B-complex, magnesium glycinate (the form of magnesium is important for good absorption and to prevent a laxative effect), zinc picolinate, and D3 (around 5000IU daily). These are supplements we routinely recommend on this forum to newly diagnosed celiacs and in view of your dramatic weight loss it would likely be appropriate for you as well. It often takes around 2 years for the villous lining of the small bowel to fully heal after going gluten free and until then, nutrient absorption will be compromised. The small bowel is the section of the intestines where all of our nutrition is taken up. Keep us posted.
    • terrymouse
      I'm 5'2" so it's weight I could afford to lose. I guess what's concerning is that it's not on purpose, I haven't been active because I don't have much energy, and it's been steadily going down since I started keeping track of it. So I'm not too worried about where I'm at right now, but it's something I'm keeping an eye on.
    • trents
      A classic case of more than one medical problem going on at a time. We often forget that can happen. Are you concerned about your weight loss? Is your current weight too thin for your height, gender and general build?
×
×
  • Create New...