# How long can a baby exist (healthily) solely on breastmilk?



## 1stTimeMama4-4-10 (Feb 4, 2010)

I looked it up and didn't find a satisfactory answer. I plan to breastfeed at least two years, likely longer, and I was wondering at what point solids actually being NECESSARY for development. We plan to introduce them at around 6m (she is currently 5m), but mostly for fun and experimenting and not really for nutrition. Any links or resources would be appreciated.


----------



## tabrizia (Oct 24, 2007)

I've heard of healthy children with sensory issues subsiding on breastmilk only till 2 or 3. That being said, DD has had solids since around 6 months old, but didn't show any huge interest in them till around 15 or 16 months. She would eat small amounts till then, but breastmilk was probably 80 to 90% of her diet until fairly recently. DS was the same way, he didn't really take off eating till 14 or 15 months, he would eat food before that point, but that was the point when we went from breastfeeding being 80 to 90% of their calories to being 10 to 25% of their calories.


----------



## octobermom (Aug 31, 2005)

my senseory issue first surrived with BM 100% only till 18 months and then with it clearly still giving her at least 90% of her calorie needs till over two years.. She made the big switch year 3 and self weaned her 4th year.

wait I should be fair due to suck swallow and supply issues she did recieve formula in addition to breast in her early months but she was 100% on breastmilk only by 9 months..

Deanna


----------



## riverview9 (Aug 6, 2008)

1 year


----------



## accountclosed2 (May 28, 2007)

There is a distinct lack of evidence for either, i.e. if anyone is looking to do a health study, research, "How long a child can be exclusively on breastmilk, and when to introduce what nutrients for optimum nutrition" would be a very good choice!

Check out this page:

http://www.kellymom.com/bf/bfextended/ebf-benefits.html

She has a lot of links, there might be a few more, I don't remember, I have a list of all the studies I've found, relating mainly to iron, but also other nutritional needs, from there, and from other studies:

*Iron*

K.G. Dewey, et al., Iron supplementation affects growth and morbidity of breast-fed infants: results of a randomized trial in Sweden and Honduras
Journal of Nutrition 132, no. 2 (Nov 2002): 3249-55.

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/132/11/3249

Contents: 4-6 month old infants on breastmilk but allowed tastes of vegetables, control group supplemented with iron, result: extra iron un-necessary.

A. Pisacane et al., Iron status in breast-fed infants, Journal of Pediatrics 127, no. 3 (Sep 1995): 429-31

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7658275

Contents: small study of ca 20 infants, partially or exclsively breastfed with no supplementing (given solids possibly, but no formula or vitamins/iron). Found no risk of iron feficiency.

Pastel RA, Howanitz PJ, and Osk, FA. Iron sufficiency with prolonged exclusive breast-feeding in Peruvian infants, Clin Pediatr 20:625-26, 1981.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7273572

Contents: 6 exclusively breastfed infants, some over 12 months old, no iron deficiency.

Siimes MA, Salmenpera L, Perheentupa J. Exclusive breast-feeding for 9 months: risk of iron deficiency. J Pediatr 1984 Feb;104(2):196-9.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6694011

Contents: The study behind WHO's recommendations. 30 breastfed infants compared with 30 on formula. None of the breastfed babies were iron deficient by 7 months. By 9 months 2 or 3 were slightly deficient.

*Optimal duration of exclusive breastfeeding*

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11869667

Contents: A study of studies. Basically says exclusive breastfeeding for at least 6 months totally safe from nutritional perspective.

Risk of Infant Anemia Is Associated with Exclusive Breast-Feeding and Maternal Anemia in a Mexican Cohort
http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/136/2/452

Contents: Larger study, but only 5 infants exclusively breastfed past 6 months. 3 of them iron deficient. They do not state that the mothers of the deficient babies were deficient, but they do say that anemic mothers were more likely to have iron deficient babies, and more often the longer the babies breastfed.

Fat and Energy Contents of Expressed Human Breast Milk in Prolonged Lactation
Dror Mandel, MD, MHA, Ronit Lubetzky, MD, Shaul Dollberg, MD, FACN, Shimon Barak, MD, Francis B. Mimouni, MD, FAAP, FACN

http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...ull/116/3/e432

Contents: The milk from 34 mothers whose babies were over a year old was compared to milk form 27 mothers of less than 6-month olds. "Human milk expressed by mothers who have been lactating for >1 year has significantly increased fat and energy contents, compared with milk expressed by women who have been lactating for shorter periods. During prolonged lactation, the fat energy contribution of breast milk to the infant diet might be significant."

Nutritional composition of human milk for full-term infants
http://www.uptodate.com/patients/con...iL7ncr_TSU_9Ui

Article, with references.

Breast milk volume and composition during late lactation (7-20 months) (Dewey)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6502372

Contents: "Breast milk composition of 119 samples collected by 46 women during months 7-20 of lactation was compared with composition of 101 samples collected at 4-6 months. Breast milk intake of 10 infants was determined by test-weighing for 1 or more months during months 7-16 of lactation. Longitudinal decreases in milk concentrations of zinc, copper, and potassium, previously documented for the first 6 months, continued into the second 6 months, while protein, iron, and sodium concentrations showed no further decline. Lactose, fat, calcium, and magnesium concentrations were similar to those in earlier stages of lactation. Weaning was associated with significant changes in milk composition: When milk volume fell below 300 ml/day, there was an increase in protein and sodium and a decrease in lactose, calcium, and zinc. Breast milk intake of infants not supplemented with cow's milk or formula averaged 875 ml/day (93% of total energy intake) at 7 months and 550 ml/day (50% of total energy intake) at 11-16 months. Total energy intake increased from 610 to 735 kcal/day, but energy intake per kilogram remained constant at a relatively low 70-79 kcal/kg/day. Our results suggest the need for further studies of nutrient intake and requirements of breast-fed infants during late lactation."

Complementary Feeding and Breastfeeding

http://pediatrics.aappublications.or.../106/5/S2/1301

Contents: Another study by Dewey, this one about how solid intake influences intake of breastmilk. The more solids that go in, the less breastmilk.

Dewey K. G., Cohen R. J., Brown K. H., Rivera L. L. Age of introduction of complementary foods of low birthweight breastfed infants: a randomized intervention study in Honduras. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1999;69:679-686

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abst...e2=tf_ipsecsha

Conclusion: 'There was no growth advantage of complementary feeding of small-for-gestational-age, breast-fed infants between 4 and 6 mo of age." Which is interesting, since the doctors/nurses seem to believe the opposite!

Dewey KG. Nutrition, Growth, and Complementary Feeding of the Breastfed Infant. Pediatric Clinics of North American. February 2001;48(1).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11236735

Contents: "Although additional research is needed [...] the following conclusions are well substantiated by the evidence available to date: Breast milk alone can meet nutrient needs during the first 6 months, with the possible exception of vitamin D in certain populations and iron in infants of relatively low birth weight. Complementary foods offered before 6 months of age tend to displace breast milk and do not confer any growth advantage over exclusive breastfeeding. Breast milk continues to provide substantial amounts of key nutrients well beyond the first year of life, especially protein, fat, and most vitamins. Breastfed infants tend to gain less weight and usually are leaner than are formula-fed infants in the second half of infancy. This difference does not seem to be the result of nutritional deficits but rather infant self-regulation of energy intake. [...]The nutrients most likely to be limiting in the diets of breastfed infants are minerals, such as iron, zinc, and calcium. Using the following guidelines can help to ensure that the nutrient needs of the breastfed child are met: Continue to breastfeed as often as the infant desires. Aim for a variety of complementary foods, with fruits, vegetables, and animal products (e.g., meat, fish, poultry, or egg) offered daily. [&#8230;] Be alert to any signs that the child's appetite, growth, or development is impaired. When in doubt, a balanced vitamin-mineral supplement is advisable. Make mealtimes enjoyable."

"In the second year (12-23 months), 448 mL of breastmilk provides:
29% of energy requirements
43% of protein requirements
36% of calcium requirements
75% of vitamin A requirements
76% of folate requirements
94% of vitamin B12 requirements
60% of vitamin C requirements"
-- Dewey 2001

Although the studies done are rather small and too few, the WHO made the call EBF for 7 month is totally fine, no risk. And as it is known that the baby has stores of iron for at least the first half year, probably longer (I need to check this research next, I guess), it is probably likely to be so. However, there are hardly any studies that include any babies exclusively breastfed past 6 months, only one with any babies exclusively breastfed past 12 months (The Peruvian study with only six infants, the ages of all infants are uncertain).

In all honesty, the idea that babies breastfed exclusively for longer than say 6 or 7 months are at any greater risk than other babies of iron deficiency, or any other deficiency, must be a myth, as there is NO EVIDENCE at all.

But as most American babies are tested for iron deficiency (I thought?), wouldn't it be quite an easy research for someone? All you'd need to do would be collect the data from doctors (or parents), and question parents on baby's food: Breastfeeding, formula, combination, when introduced formula, when introduced solids.

Personally, I would breastfeed exclusively until baby wants something else (past 6 months if possible, but much longer if needed). And if my 8+ month old was still exclusively breastfeeding, I'd check iron with a blood test.


----------



## Mrs.Music (Jun 15, 2010)

I've heard from several people and sources that before a year, feeding your kid solid foods is just to get them used to the tastes, textures and use of utensils. It has no nurtritional bearing until you stop nursing and they turn to solids for the majority of their meals. My DD nursed almost exclusively until 18 months (she just hated solids for some reason) and continued to nurse until she was 2. My son, however, decided food was awesome and was totally off the boob at 14 months. You kinda have to let your baby lead you and remember that the "food" isn't important. If she hates it, give it a while and try again later.


----------



## Zoesmama (Mar 26, 2005)

With my dd I offered some at 6 months but she wasn't even eating even one "meal" a day because she had very little interest in puree'd foods. So it was around 8-9 months she started having "meals" of puree on daily basis more than once in the day. She wasn't eating them long and grabbing at my food so I slowly got her into chewing foods and used those safe feeder things. When I felt comfortable I added chopped broccoli to her menu. To this day(7 now) she adores her broccoli.

I would think by 1 at least you'd want to be introducing "solids" in puree form though.


----------



## Carolyn_mtl (Dec 19, 2008)

My dd is 12.5 months and EBF. She refuses solids, gags, turns her head away.. She only wants mommy's milk. I was only slightly concerned about her iron levels (my ped was "very" concerned) so I just had them tested. Got the results back last week and they are great, and well within the normal limits. Like many have said, solids at this age are just for exploring, most, if not all the nutrients your baby needs can be found in your milk.


----------



## lookatreestar (Apr 14, 2008)

for both of my LOs, under a year was really just for fun, i wasn't trying to get them to eat a lot or shoveling baby food at them.

i saw a big jump w/ solids anywhere from 12-18 mos with my kids. it seemed like they really took off with exploring and loved the food aspect and water was awesome! (btw they are both still bfing)


----------



## lookatreestar (Apr 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Carolyn_mtl* 
My dd is 12.5 months and EBF. She refuses solids, gags, turns her head away.. She only wants mommy's milk. I was only slightly concerned about her iron levels (my ped was "very" concerned) so I just had them tested. *Got the results back last week and they are great, and well within the normal limits*. Like many have said, solids at this age are just for exploring, most, if not all the nutrients your baby needs can be found in your milk.

that is so cool! breastfeeding is awesome


----------



## curiousmother (Apr 23, 2016)

Carolyn_mtl said:


> My dd is 12.5 months and EBF. She refuses solids, gags, turns her head away.. She only wants mommy's milk. I was only slightly concerned about her iron levels (my ped was "very" concerned) so I just had them tested. Got the results back last week and they are great, and well within the normal limits. Like many have said, solids at this age are just for exploring, most, if not all the nutrients your baby needs can be found in your milk.


When did you little one finally decide to start eating solids? If you don't mind me asking, was you pediatrician concerned about her weight?


----------



## chickabiddy (Jan 30, 2004)

Just posted this in a similar thread: My daughter didn't eat any solids at all until 14 months and was still probably 90% breastfed at age two. I don't remember her exact percentiles but she generally wore the clothing sizes corresponding to her age, so pretty average. Met all her milestones on track or earlier. She's 14 now and eats real food.  She's on the small side at 5'1" and size 4 (and not likely to grow more), but there are some pretty short people in my family tree.


----------



## elliha (Jul 20, 2014)

As is described here there isn't really an exact limit to when they start needing food an most likely it is different for different babies. Mine ate quite a lot of food from the start, it was more a question of me limiting it as her stomach couldn't take the amounts of food she liked to eat. Other people i know have ha babies who have mainly eaten breastmilk until 1-1,5 years of age and shown very little interest in changing that. I do think that from about 1 years of age it starts to be more important for more babies than before 1.


----------



## mumto1 (Feb 17, 2016)

*it depends on your situation, the baby*

My son went cold turkey at about 1.5 and when he showed interest again about 1 week or so later I gently refused him (I had had a bad bout of mastitis because of that) and he was fine. Nursing him at that age was becoming challenging, he was starting to talk a lot, and wanted to move move move. Some people find nursing helps soothes kids through toddlerhood. Eating is about getting used to different tastes and textures, and integrating into the rituals of family and society. My son was showing an interest in our food, grabbing it off of our plates, drooling when we cut up fruit, it was clear he was ready to eat. If I had had the opportunity to have other babies, I think it would have been the same, letting them show the direction.


----------



## Carolyn_mtl (Dec 19, 2008)

curiousmother said:


> When did you little one finally decide to start eating solids? If you don't mind me asking, was you pediatrician concerned about her weight?


She finally started trying foods at 19 months, so was 100% ebf until then. By the time she was 2 she would eat almost anything I gave her, but continued to nurse quite a bit until closer to 2.5 when I was preg with dd2.


----------



## Oceanspray (Nov 20, 2014)

Technically, years. but most babies don't. If yours has special reasons for not being ready I would not force it. You may end up with food issues later on. Breastmilk, assuming you eat a balanced diet generally, will tide your child over as long as he or she needs it. They are probably the best judges of when they are ready for something different.

I know you've received lots of information. I would be more concerned with introducing solids too early rather than too late. Ideally, in my opinion, starting later like at 8-10 months is better than aiming for 5-6 months. I also think with other posters that 19 months or 2+ years is fine also.


----------



## blessedwithboys (Dec 8, 2004)

yes to oceanspray and ill add that a baby should able to sit up and put chunks in their own mouth. if you sitting the baby back in a reclining seat and shoveling in puree via spoon, its too soon. i would not worry until about 24 mons.


----------



## lilitchka (Jan 19, 2012)

I don't really agree with one of pp that said if EBF at 8 months, would verify iron level.
I am convinced that the iron thing is all about pushing cereals. we rearly get encouraged to start red meat very early because baby will have low iron. however, we are always encouraged to start cereal fortified with iron. 
but that is iron added artifically into cereals. why would all healthy babies, with a healthy mothers, in a developped country need systematic iron supplement in 'cereals''? what is so wrong with our babies bodies and ours, that they can't be OK with what is normally available in their environemnet (normal food, breast milk)?

even if there was a study verifying iron level of EBF infants at 8 months and those started on cereals, and it shows that the EBF group has lower iron stores, I would conclude that the definition of normal iron stores needs to be adjusted then, because it is much more normal to be EBF at 8months, then eating iron supplements 3 times a day. 

there are intervention that affect iron stores at 12 months. delaying cord clamping at birth of just 1 minute, increases significantly iron stores at 12 months. that's impressif. 
maybe we can just EBF our babies until they decide they want more, and just wait 1 more minute at birth before clamping the cord and then we are good with the iron.....


----------



## mumofmany7 (Jun 6, 2016)

mine always start food at 6 months but they could go longer on just breast milk x


----------

