One of the most common questions among parents is whether little ones can have garlic (or anything flavorful) or if sticking to bland food is the way to go. We’d be out of work if introducing cardamom to your baby’s applesauce wasn’t both healthy and delicious for them. We understand your worry though, most of us grew up with strict guidelines — either rooted in a family or the pediatricians—that told us that babies were to be introduced to foods in this order: bland food, fruits, and then veggies.

Turns out, the new American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation states that there is no scientific evidence to prove that foods need to be introduced in any particular order. The good news? You can now focus on variety and flavor from the start and help craft an adventurous eater in the process.

In Bee Wilson’s book, First Bite, a tactic called “tiny tests” is encouraged. What you want to do is introduce a new veggie or spice to your little one, bite by bite, and multiple times. But before we get there, let’s debunk some common myths.

Myth #1: If your baby didn’t like it the first time, they never will.

This is one of the most common misconceptions among parents. Studies show that repetitive exposure to a new food, whether fruit or veggies, is the biggest indicator of whether a baby will acquire a taste for the food. In fact, it can take upwards of 20 tries for your child to become receptive to a new flavor. Don’t give up on your little one or your desire to expand their food repertoire. It takes a lot of practice, patience and commitment to learning to love the food rainbow.

Myth #2. Babies are to be introduced to bland foods first.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has actually walked back this suggestion. While at first, they recommended that parents stick to bland flavors when introducing food to their babies, they have now moved to recommend a wide array of flavors. Ultimately, it’s the introduction of different flavors and textures that will help expand your little one’s palate and reduce the risk of pickiness, or neophobia (being afraid of new foods).

Myth #3: Babies will only eat veggies and spices if they’re masked by sweet fruit tastes.

Babies are drawn to new food like magnets, they don’t have a point of reference on the fact that they’re supposed to dislike Swiss chard and love bananas. Wilson recommends introducing all flavors to baby within their flavor window, which lasts from month 6 to month 18, to up your chances of them loving bitter, bold, and savory flavors.

Myth #4: Breastfed babies are used to sweet flavors because breastmilk is sweet. 

Actually, as our resident Pediatrician, Mary Versfelt, MD, noted babies are introduced to hints of the same flavors that mama introduces into her system. Both through pregnancy and breastfeeding, research has shown that what a woman eats can influence a baby’s food preferences and is a child’s first exposure to flavors.

I'm the Founder & CEO of Fresh Bellies baby food brand. I've won foodie awards, pitched to Shark Tank and appeard on Forbes and CNBC. Originally from Guayaquil, Ecuador, I live in New York with my husband, Fernando and daughters, Isabella and Alexa Luna.

Sesame Workshop and the LEGO Foundation are helping parents to play! The two educational organizations recently conducted a multi-country research project that evaluated the Play Every Day program.

What is the Play Every Day program? Sesame Workshop and the LEGO Foundation created this global initiative as a way to help parents and caregivers better understand the value of play when it comes to early childhood education and development. During the 12-week program period, Sesame Workshop sent pros into the homes of families in low-resource communities (in India, Mexico and South Africa) to help the adults learn about play and here’s what the perfectly playful partners found!

The evaluation revealed the importance of helping parents to better understand the what’s, why’s and how’s of play. Parents in all three countries played more often with their children, reported increased confidence in acting as “play mentors” to their children and reported increased confidence in using recycled materials as play objects.

Dr. Kim Foulds, Senior Director of International Research and Evaluation, Sesame Workshop, said in a press statement, “Our research findings affirm the potential of the Play Every Day model to improve knowledge about play and influence play related behavior among caregivers and children, particularly in low-resource settings.”

Foulds went on to add, “Given that existing global literature on playful learning best practices is predominantly focused on research in western developed countries, we’re excited to share our findings and contribute to the growing body of evidence attesting to the impact of learning through play.”

Along with helping the families in the pilot program play, Sesame Workshop and the LEGO Foundation will use the research findings to guide future programming, including a $100 million humanitarian play program that will support children impacted by the Rohingya and Syrian refugee crises, as well as families in South Africa.

—Erica Loop

Featured photo: Sesame Street via YouTube

 

RELATED STORIES

Does “Sesame Street” Make Kids Smarter? New Research Weighs In

“Sesame Street” Turns 50 This Year & Has Big Plans for Its Littlest Fans

“Sesame Street” Is Bringing Sunny Days to Your Own Neighborhood on Its National Tour

If you have a gamer in the house, you have probably wondered whether video games impact your child’s social skills. Recent research published in the journal Child Development may have found that this interactive form of screen-time isn’t all bad—at least for some kids.

Researchers from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU Social Research, the University of California, Davis and St. Olav’s Hospital in Norway delved into data from 873 Norwegian children ages 6 through 12 and what they found out about social development and gaming might surprise you.

photo: Jessica Lewis via Pexels

Using a combination of parental, self and teacher reporting from ages six to 12, researchers reviewed how much time was spent playing video games and reports of social competence. What did the researchers find?

When it comes to boys, video game play didn’t affect (either positively or negatively) social development. But for girls, increased video game play equaled weaker social skill development between the ages of 10 and 12.

Children of both genders who struggled socially at ages 8 and 10 also spent more time playing video games at ages 10 and 12. But there’s no clear evidence whether video game play caused weak social skills or it was the other way around.

Of course, this isn’t exactly the first study to tackle the child development-video game connection. A 2016 study found that video game play was connected to decreases in peer relationship problems. Research, published in the journal Computers and Human Behavior found that playing prosocial types of video games could positively impact both peer relationships and the development of empathy.

If you’re wondering whether this means video games are good for your child, the jury’s still out. Use caution, monitor your kiddo and strive for a screen-time vs. everything else-time balance.

—Erica Loop

 

RELATED STORIES

11 Video Games You Can Feel Good About Your Kid Playing After School

Playing Video Games Really Does Make You Smarter, Study Finds

Here’s Why Girl Gamers Rock—& Why We Need More of Them

The screen time debate seems endless. With so many conflicting studies and recommendations, it can be hard to know what’s best. For the first time ever the World Health Organization issued screen time guidelines for kids.

The new guidelines, which are somewhat similar to the recommendations issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics, state that kids under five should not spend more than one hour per day watching screens and that kids under one should not have any screen time whatsoever.

photo: StockSnap via Pixabay

Some experts argue that the guidelines don’t take into account the benefits of certain digital media and that WHO is only considering time versus quality of content. “Our research has shown that currently there is not strong enough evidence to support the setting of screen time limits,” said Dr. Max Davie of Britain’s Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health. “The restricted screen time limits suggested by WHO do not seem proportionate to the potential harm.”

WHO didn’t get into the specifics of what harm could be caused by screen time beyond the recommendations, but explained that the guidelines were needed to combat the increasing amount of non-physical behavior among kids. The agency recommends that kids over one year should have at least three hours of physical activity every day.

—Shahrzad Warkentin

featured image: Annie Spratt via Unsplash 

RELATED STORIES

New Research Says More Screen Time Can Raise the Risk of an ADHD Diagnosis

Has Screen Time Gone Up Among Babies? A New Study Says Its Doubled

Here’s How Much Screen Time Little Kids Are Really Getting, But Is It Too Much?

During a routine security review back in January 2019 Facebook caught a serious issue. As it turns out, some user passwords were stored in a readable format, making it possible for Facebook employees (but not anyone outside of the company) to find and view. While the initial announcement noted that hundreds of millions of Facebook Lite users, tens of millions of other Facebook users and tens of thousands of Instagram users were affected, a more recent discovery noted a much larger problem.

So how many Facebook and Instagram users are actually affected by this security issue? According to an update published Apr. 18, Facebook found additional logs of Instagram passwords stored in a readable format—bringing the current estimate of affected IG users to somewhere in the millions range.

photo: Toni Hukkanen via Unsplash 

If you’re wondering if Facebook routinely stores passwords in readable text, the answer is no. The company’s security “best practices” include masking all passwords, making it impossible for anyone (including company employees) to see them. But, in this case, internal problems didn’t allow the proper masking to happen.

Before you worry too much, Facebook assures its users that the problem is fixed. Beyond that, when the initial issue was detected Facebook didn’t find evidence of employee misuse of the readable text passwords.

Users affected by this security issue will receive notification from Facebook. If you haven’t heard anything, but still have concerns, changing your passwords is always a good idea.

—Erica Loop

 

RELATED STORIES

Here’s What to Do When Your Kid Locks Your iPad—for 25 MILLION Minutes

The Facebook Hack Is Actually a Big Deal. Here’s What You Need to Do ASAP

Worried About Privacy From Amazon’s Alexa? These Easy Settings Will Ease Your Mind

Recent research, published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, may have found a connection between maternal gestational diabetes and the development of diabetes in their children. While gestational diabetes in the mother doesn’t cause the disease in the child, this new study provides evidence that it may increase the risk.

The researchers reviewed data from public health insurance administrative databases from Quebec, Canada—totaling 73,180 randomly selected mothers. After comparing data on mothers with and without gestational diabetes, they found the rate of childhood onset diabetes higher for the kiddos of the gestational diabetes group.

photo: dw-lifestylefitigrafie via Pixabay

While the study does show an increased risk for developing diabetes (4.5 children developed the disease per every 10,000 in the mothers with gestational diabetes group versus 2.4 per every 10,000 in the group whose mothers did not have the disease), it’s important to note that the study’s results did not specifically distinguish childhood onset type 1 from type 2 diabetes. Given the typical distribution of the two types of diabetes in children, the researchers did infer that the majority of childhood onset cases were type 1.

So what does this research mean for mothers and mothers-to-be? According to Dr. Kaberi Dasgupta, a clinician-scientist from the Centre for Outcomes Research and Evaluation (CORE) at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, “This link of diabetes in children and youth with gestational diabetes in the mother has the potential to stimulate clinicians, parents, and children and youth themselves to consider the possibility of diabetes if offspring of a mother with gestational diabetes mellitus develop signs and symptoms such as frequent urination, abnormal thirst, weight loss or fatigue.”

—Erica Loop

RELATED STORIES

Mothers’ Exposure to Pesticides Is Linked to Increased Autism Risk, New Study Finds

The FDA Is Making These Important Changes to Its Mammogram Guidelines

New Dietary Guidelines For Babies & Pregnant Women Are Long Overdue

The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released new guidelines on introducing peanuts to children. Based on the AAP’s findings, it looks like there’s no need to wait, as previous guidelines recommended.

The AAP’s previous guidelines, first published in 2008, recommended delaying the introduction of potential food allergens such as peanuts, eggs and fish. That meant many of us mamas held off on that first PB&J sandwich. According to new data published in the March issue of Pediatrics, there’s little scientific evidence to back up this practice.

photo: Tookapic via Pexels

Not only does the Pediatrics article dismiss the previously-held belief that early peanut introduction could induce allergies, the data shows the opposite is actually true. After analyzing data from two major studies, the AAP found peanut introduction between four and 11 months of age may actually reduce the risk of developing an allergy to that food.

So should you give your baby peanuts or peanut products early on? According the recommendations from an expert panel and the AAP’s revised guidelines, infants at high risk for a peanut allergy should be introduced to peanuts between four and six months. Obviously, choose a baby-safe option—avoid giving your infants whole peanuts or sticky butters that pose a choking hazard. And above all, always consult your child’s pediatrician.

—Erica Loop

 

RELATED STORIES

Kids Eating Too Many Cookies? Blame Social Media—Not Cookie Monster, Study Says

Parents Often Forget about These Spots When Storing Medicine Away from Kids

New Study Says It’s Okay If Your House Isn’t Spotless—Nor Should It Be

What if you could prevent pregnancy without having to take a daily pill, get a shot or use some type of intrauterine device? According to recent research published in the journal European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Healthcare, the Dot fertility app could make having to take hormonal birth control a thing of the past.

Dot is a fertility app that uses an algorithm to predict pregnancy risk. It adapts or “learns” over time, personalizing high and low fertility times for the user. The first-of-its-kind study, conducted by researchers from the Institute for Reproductive Health at Georgetown University Medical Center, followed over 200 participants for 13 menstrual cycles. The results showed a five percent “typical-use” failure rate and a one percent “perfect-use” failure rate.

photo: FirmBee via Pixabay

The study (which was conducted online via surveys and instant messages) revealed that out of the hundreds of women participating, there were only 25 pregnancies. Twenty-four of the pregnancies resulted from incorrect use and one occurred during a cycle when the Dot user reportedly used the app correctly.

Victoria Jennings, PhD, principal investigator of the study and director of the IRH at Georgetown, said, “Women must be able to base their app choice on solid evidence about how well the method works and what’s involved in using it. That’s why it was so important that an app like Dot undergo a rigorous effectiveness trial conducted according to established study guidelines used to study other methods.”

Jennings also noted, “This is a particularly important finding because it suggests that Dot can be appropriate for a wide range of women.”

Even though this study could usher in a major breakthrough when it comes to pregnancy prevention, always consult your medical provider before starting, stopping or changing your current method of birth control.

—Erica Loop

 

RELATED STORIES

Science Says 50 Is the New 40 (When It Comes to Safely Having Babies, That Is)

When Does the Male Birth Control Pill Come Out? Science Gets Closer

Do Fertility Diets Really Work? New Science Offers Answers

The U.S. Food & Drug Administration issued a warning regarding asbestos in certain Claire’s products after test results demonstrated the presence of the fibers in several makeup palettes. Asbestos is dangerous when particles or fibers enter the lungs or stomach and can lead to lung damage and cancer.

The items affected by the warning are Claire’s Eye Shadows, Compact Powder and Contour Palette and currently, are not being sold in stores. The FDA issued the warning to alert consumers to check their home for previously purchased items and to cease using the products immediately.

photo: Mike Mozart via Flickr

The FDA released the warning several years after Claire’s pulled nine makeup products from their shelves back in 2017. The statement comes after the organization tested several of those pulled items and found tremolite asbestos.

Claire’s has been in contact with the FDA and actually disputes the findings, stating that the methods used to classify the fibers as asbestos are incorrect. Representatives from Claire’s sent Red Tricycle the following statement via email:

At Claire’s, customer safety is paramount, and we pride ourselves on providing our customers with the highest quality and safest products. We wish to address today’s FDA warning that three cosmetic items sold by Claire’s may have been contaminated with asbestos. We assure customers that our products are safe.

Out of an abundance of caution, we have removed the three products identified by the FDA from our stores, and are also removing any remaining talc based cosmetic products. We will honor returns of any Claire’s talc based cosmetics.

There is no evidence that any products sold by Claire’s are unsafe. In early 2018, the three items identified by the FDA were extensively tested by multiple independent accredited laboratories, and all products were found to be compliant with all relevant cosmetic safety regulations. The recent test results the FDA have shared with us show significant errors. Specifically, the FDA test reports have mis-characterized fibers in the products as asbestos, in direct contradiction to established EPA and USP criterion for classifying asbestos fibers. Despite our efforts to discuss these issues with the FDA, they insisted on moving forward with their release. We are disappointed that the FDA has taken this step, and we will continue to work with them to demonstrate the safety of our products.

You can contact Claire’s via its Customer Service page here.

––Karly Wood

 

RELATED STORIES

FYI: There Are New Chicken Nugget & Chicken Product Recalls

Kids’ Cereal Sold at Trader Joe’s & More Recalled for Undeclared Allergens

Recall Alert: Green Bean & Butternut Squash Recall Affects 9 Southern States

If you’re confused by how to read food expiration dates, you aren’t the only one who just doesn’t get it. Best by? Sell by? Use by? Before you toss a seemingly ancient box of pasta or a might-be expired can of tomatoes, read on.

Do you assume that the “sell by” date on your milk, cheese or any other product is set by some sort of research or government standard? Even though this is a popular view, expiration dates aren’t actually regulated in the United States.

photo: difisher via Pixabay

A recent study published in the journal Waste Management examined what consumers really understand when it comes to food expiration dates and wording. According to the study, one-third of the 1,029 adults surveyed incorrectly believed that the “best if used by” or “use by” date was federally regulated. Another 26 percent of consumers were unsure whether the date was, or wasn’t, regulated. Along with confusion over whether use by dates are or aren’t regulated, a whopping 84 percent of study participants threw away food that was near its package expiration date at least occasionally.

So what do the different phrases and dates really mean? According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, manufacturer-provided food dating that says “best by” refers to when food is of its best quality—an arbitrary determination made by the company and not a safety guide.

The only current exception is baby formula. “Best by” dates printed on baby formula are safety indicators, meaning that you need to follow those strictly.

photo: Alan Levine via Flickr

Phrases are a bit trickier to understand than dates. A “use by” date refers to the last day of the food’s peak quality. A “sell by” date is more for retailers than consumers, indicating the last day a seller should display the item for sale.

This brings us to the big question: should you throw away food that’s past its “use by” or “sell by” date? There’s no clear answer. Properly stored food that has no evidence of spoilage typically doesn’t need to go in the trash. Unsure about how long perishable items—such as ground beef, chicken or milk—can stay fresh and safe in the fridge or freezer? Foodsafety.gov has a handy chart to use.

—Erica Loop

 

RELATED STORIES

Want to Eat Healthier? Science Says Go Ahead & Have Dessert—First

Why Are There So Many More Food Recalls? You’re Not Imagining Things

3 Healthy Food Hacks You Can Totally Sneak into Their Lunches & Snacks