If there are still people who believe anything the Nestle executive told them at the Nestle Family event or anything they claim elsewhere, despite my analysis of the answers I received from Nestle, despite the ongoing work of Baby Milk Action’s Boycott Nestle Blog to expose Nestle’s lies, and despite a first person account of Nestle formula advertising seen in Ethiopia, maybe the photographic evidence I collected in Berlin today will change their mind.
I asked Nestle whether it markets any complementary foods (i.e. baby food, cereals, etc.) for babies under 6 months of age. Nestle answered that:
Nestlé fully supports the May 2001 WHA Resolution 54.2 which changed the recommended duration of exclusive breastfeeding from 4 – 6 month to 6 months, thereafter introducing complementary foods while recommending continued breast feeding for as long as possible. Thus we implement this resolution in the same way as we implement the WHO Code and we have completed label changes on complementary foods to follow the 6-months recommendation.
Today I was shopping at one of the largest dm Drogeriemarkt stores in Berlin. They have a huge baby food section, which includes a huge selection of Nestle Alete baby food. Most of the food (not just some of it, not just an exception, not just old stock, not just starter cereal even) was labelled as being appropriate to start at 4 months of age.
The food labeled as appropriate after 4 months included:
carrots and potatoes
Combinations of beef, carrot potato or pork, parsnips and potato.
Pears
Creamed spinach with potatoes (which includes whole milk as an ingredient)
Bananas, peaches and rice
Garden fruits
Beyond the photographic evidence, Nestle Alete’s German website clearly demonstrates that this isn’t just a labeling issue. In its information for parents on infant nutrition, the page on Stage 1, starting after 4 months, includes the following introduction:
ORIGINAL GERMAN: Strampeln, Strecken, Greifen – je aktiver Ihr Baby wird, desto mehr Energie braucht es. Ihre Muttermilch bzw. das Fläschchen bleibt zwar erstmal Nahrungsgrundlage. Doch nach dem 4. Monat genügt das allmählich nicht mehr, um Ihr Kleines mit allem Nötigen zu versorgen. So rückt der große Moment näher: Das erste Löffelchen!
ENGLISH TRANSLATION: Kicking, stretching, grabbing – the more active your baby gets, the more energy he needs. Your breast milk or infant formula continues to provide the basic nutrition for your baby. But starting at 4 months, it is no longer sufficient to provide your little one with everything he needs. That means the big moment is approaching: The first spoonful!
The labels and the website information makes it 100% clear that in Germany Nestle has not completed label changes on complementary foods to follow the 6-months recommendation or done anything else to demonstrate its support of the this recommendation. In fact, they continue to tell women that breastmilk is no longer sufficient after 4 months of age.
Not only does this show that they clearly do not support the WHO resolution changing the duration of exclusive breastfeeding to 6 months (despite their claim that they do), but it also calls into question whether you can believe anything else that they say. If they would and have lied about something that can be so easily verified by walking into any store selling Nestle baby food in Germany, what wouldn’t they lie about?
phdinparenting (758)
Andrea (89)
Amber (87)
Kayris (67)
Rebecca (53)
Stephanie (49)
Marcy (46)
Upstatemomof3 (44)
Lisa (39)
Sarah (35)
Michelle (34)
Olivia (34)
Lauren (33)
Amy (32)
Paige @ Baby Dust... (31)
Melodie (30)
ebbandflo aka pom... (29)
Fearless Formula ... (27)
Summer (27)
Candace (26)
{ 4 trackbacks }
{ 69 comments… read them below or add one }
Wow.
I think my head exploded when I read this part: “But starting at the 4th month, it is no longer sufficient to provide your little one with everything he needs.”
I agree.
Annie – what can we do to help?
Boycott Nestle. Tell your friends and family to boycott Nestle.
Lobby the government to endorse and enforce the WHO International Code on the Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes.
Report violations of the WHO International Code on the Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes.
Yeah, that made me say “WHAAAAA???”
Tell that to my youngest son, who nursed exclusively til 16 months.
On their website it states from 6 months…but on the shelves of Tesco in the UK Cerelac is labelled from 4 months.
“it is no longer sufficient to provide your little one with everything he needs”??? Unbelievable. Just wrong.
Holy cow, well done inspector. So disturbing, breast milk not sufficient? Man, its like they are looking for a fight there. Wonder what the other international sites purport.
Have you seen this?
Baby Cereals Stracciatella
http://www.nestlebaby.com/ch-de/baby_nutrition/products/product_detail.htm?stage=-1&r=395&pci=5
“perfekt an die Bedürfnisse Ihres Babys angepasst”
“perfectly adjusted to your baby’s needs”
With chocolate flakes!
Karin: I’ve seen similar things (and actually took a photo of one from Hipp the other day) and may post about that soon (collecting more stuff). Your link doesn’t load properly for me, but I will seek it out when I write about chocolate baby food.
For those of you who can read German, you might want to read this:
http://www.afs-stillen.de/upload/pdf/Stellungnahme_zum_Thema_Optimaler_Zeitpunkt_Beikosteinfuehrung.pdf
Some recent studies claimed that breastfeeding for more than four months does not prevent allergies. So some people (guess who) concluded that breastfeeding after 4 months is useless.
Thanks for the link Karin. I hope to do a post about breastfeeding in Germany at some point and that post is useful information. If you have a source for good breastfeeding stats (more detail than the little bit in that article), I’d love to get my hands on it.
Here you are.
http://www.geburtskanal.de/StillenVerbindet_VivianWeigert.pdf
http://www.bmg.bund.de/cln_151/nn_1168248/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Standardartikel/K/Glossar-Kindergesundheit/KIGGS-Studie,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/KIGGS-Studie.pdf S.95
http://www.bdl-stillen.de/aktuelles/medizinuw/stilldauer05.htm
Thanks Karin!
German speaker here – actually, the labels say “after the 4th month”, so technically at 5 months of age.
Does not make it any better, but just making sure your translation is correct.
You’re right. Somehow it seems odd though. It would make more sense to say “Ab dem 5. Monat” instead of “nach dem 4. Monat” if they really wanted you to wait to the 5th, don’t you think? I think people focus in on the 4 and think 4th month. I’ll revise the text of the post though to ensure it is accurate.
They are totally trying to trick people into starting at 4 months. They think they can get away with the “after”, but what jumps out at you is the big Nr. 4.
Actually, thinking about it again.
1st month = birth to 1 month of age
2nd month = 1 month to 2 months of age
3rd month = 2 months of age to 3 months of age
4th month = 3 months of age to 4 months of age
After the 4th month = 4 months of age +
So I think that “Nach dem 4. Monat” does mean starting at 4 months of age because the “4th month” is, in fact, done by then.
You’re right here.
Considering that all other baby food containers state “ab 6.Monat”, “ab 8.Monat”, and so on, I’m absolutely positive that they WANT Moms to think it’s “AB 4.Monat”.
Another German speaker here…I totally agree with the weasly-ness and nastiness of Nestle, but they do say “allmählich” which is “slowly”, so they could try to hide behind that.
Not that that changes anything about their deceitfulness.
Yeah, but even “allmählich” insufficient is only true as of 6 months and beyond. At 4 months it shouldn’t even be a consideration and not worth a mention.
The fourth month? Don’t they just spit food out until 6-8 months?
I’m unclear on how this would even work.
Not if you lean them back and ram it down their throats. I was started on pablum when I was 6 weeks old, as were most babies in those days. There are pics of my being spoon fed in a reclined position on my grandmother’s lap before I had even reached 2 months. We know better now. But the baby food companies wish we didn’t.
Oh here even after at least 8 years of offical advice of no solids before 6 months, it’s still very common to get 6/8 week olds on rusks (sometimes in a bottle) and rice. “Did them no harm” apparently.
Also recently there’s a trend to package baby cereals in a similar way to formula.
http://www.aptamil.co.uk/products/article/aptamil-creamy-porridge from 4 months! I wish someone would put their foot down (wishes lib dems get in government, they promised they would stop this).
This actually says that the porridge is for when babies are “ready for weaning” and goes on to state that there is age variablity for weaning–yes there is but that would be in YEARS!!! Maybe one baby weans in third year and another in their fourth or fifth…. they specifically mean that a baby needs this cereal for 4+ months as they wean. I have been boycotting nestle since my oldest was born in 1990 and have no plan to stop or to stop talking about it.
How do these people sleep at night?
Well, but technically “weaning” begins as soon as anything besides bm is introduced, weaning means moving from one thing to another, not just the end of bf. But I don’t disagree, their marketing is deplorable. No matter the exact translation, the big fat 4 on the package says it all.
To be fair, no they don’t all spit it out. When my first was born, the reco here in Canada was still 4-6 months and we started solids at 5 months: he most definitely didn’t spit out a spoonful! On the other hand, we knew more with our second, and the reco was 6 months by then, so we waited even though he showed signs of being ready earlier. But even after we offered solids, he wasn’t much interested until 7-8 months (and not at all in mush). They are all different, though I think it’s better to err on the side of later rather than earlier, knowing what we know now. And yes, baby spitting food out or needing to be reclined should be a pretty good indicator of “not ready”!
Umm, no. Most babies can sit in a high chair or booster seat and be fed with a spoon by then, quite easily….and they actually like the food.
The original reason behind starting solid food early, when most babies were breastfed, was to supplement inadequate milk supply. It is all well and good to insist that everyone can have enough milk, but some women simply don’t. No big deal, I’ve known farm animals who I wouldn’t rebreed due to that very problem…and we don’t breed people for milk production. Solid food was safer than the inadequately clean milk supply of the era, unless you had your very own cow.
By the time mine were a bit past 4 months, they were happily scooting around eating dog food out of the bowl…I doubt a couple bites of carrots did irreparable harm!
Actually, at 4 months, my oldest sat independently, had teeth and could chew. She was totally OFF the charts, though, and likely the exception. And, btw, still nurses occasionally at 4.5 years, 4′ tall, and 60 pounds!
I think you’re right about the suggestive nature of after the 4th month – yet I always thought that at least the German branding was “after the 4th month” which is better than the British “from the 4th month”.
In the UK this is general branding, not just Nestle.
I agree it would be clearer to say from the 5th month, but I did notice the difference in starting dates when going between UK and Germany and commended German branding for being at least somewhat later than the UK branding.
cartside:
There are a lot of other companies here marketing things for 4 months and up too. I think it is awful. But at least they aren’t lying about it and telling people that they implemented a worldwide change to their labels to reflect the 6 month recommendation.
Nestle’s business practices suck…and then it lies about them to boot.
When I started having kids, I learned little by little that the capitalist world is full of things marketed to us as helpful or necessary to childrearing that are in fact completely unnecessary and often counterproductive (or even dangerous). These include the enema and genital shave while in labor; baby bottles, formula, and baby food; and equipment like walkers and rockers…My babies were born when their father was a soldier. The advice given by women I met on U.S. Army posts was to start mixing baby cereals and other foods into formula and feeding it with the bottle at 4 to 6 weeks! Reasons? “It will make the baby sleep through the night;” “If the baby cries between feedings it means it is still hungry after nursing;” “It will put the baby in the top percentiles at well-baby exams.” Of course, this is force-feeding and is generally regarded as too cruel even for geese. In the end none of my babies ever used bottles or pacifiers, nor did I buy baby food. Well, no–in the end, I taught all four at home, because I decided school falls into the same category–so do be careful how you follow your logic…
I know I do not believe a word they say. I know after seeing the advertisement and the formula in the grocery store in Ethiopia I have had zero respect for Nestle as a company. I will not buy their products. I was so astonished at what I saw. I was also pretty upset that the formula they offer there is not even as good of a quality of what they offer here. I mean really to offer the stuff that does not even pass the FDA is even worse than just selling their formula. They really are a scrupulous company.
And to think that here in the USA, Nestle is the formula they give at the WIC offices!!
It depends on where you live. Every state (maybe even every county) has their own deal with the formula companies through WIC. Where I live, it’s Nestle, but in other places it is Similac or Enfamil.
Yes…there are several devils in this game.
Nestle clearly can’t be trusted. Not even a little bit.
this is unacceptable is all about the money they can make while We start to believe what this companies wants us to believe! Please moms wake up
Unbelievable. Nestle is a vomitious company.
ENGLISH TRANSLATION: Kicking, stretching, grabbing – the more active your baby gets, the more energy he needs. Your breast milk or infant formula continues to provide the basic nutrition for your baby. But starting at 4 months, it is no longer sufficient to provide your little one with everything he needs. That means the big moment is approaching: The first spoonful!
OH MY GOSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I AM FLOORED! NESTLE SHOULD BE JAILED this is SICK….WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!!! GAH!!!
Stretching??? are you kidding me nestle???
My daughter is 10 months old and has NEVER had a single ounce of “babyfood” nor mashed or pureed home “babyfood”, she is exclusively nursed, and is a chunky perfect healthy girl (95th%), NEVER an inkling of illness and is non vaccinated….”basic nutrition” my ass…how about COMPLETE NUTRITION!!!! What the heck does Nestle know about nutrition!!!!
I don’t think I buy anything Nestle anyway but I will be sure from now on to make 100% sure I don’t.
Thank you PHDip
I’m considering boycotting retailers who carry nestle products, and letting them know why. It makes me sick and the only weapons we have are information and money.
I want to do this too! We just moved and in desperation, I went to the closest grocery store to re-stock our fridge, and I have never seen so many Nestle products in one place in my entire life! I need to find a new store, but we don’t know the area well. I wanted to buy chocolate chips and the choices were Nestle or the store’s brand. Nothing else. How is that even possible?
I would love to boycott all the grocery stores that carry Nestle but unfortunately ALL of our grocery stores carry Nestle products and I just cannot drive over an hour to grocery shop. But I will not buy their products.
I raised that issue (not just retailers, but also the media) in my post called Are we asking the wrong people to comply with the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes?
OH. MY. GOD! So does this mean German babies are totally different from Canadian and American babies? What a load of crap! I can’t believe they can get away with this. I mean I can, let’s face it, it’s Nestle, but, how can they get away with following a complete separate set of guidelines (their own perhaps?) just because it’s Germany?
But they say they completed label changes worldwide to reflect the 6 month recommendation…guess not.
I think I wondered over here by accident; what you describe seems to be a case of a company acting within the law of the county where it operates. Have you checked to see what the German authorities regulate in this concern? Why is this Nestles problem? Surely it is up to the German government to set the rules, or have I misunderstood. I have visited Germany, and I know they have low tolerance for rule breaking.
PZ:
The World Health Organization and the health authorities in many countries recommend that infants should be fed nothing but breastmilk (or as an alternative, infant formula) until they reach 6 months of age. The World Health Organization’s International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes, says that no complementary foods (e.g. baby cereals, baby foods, etc.) should be marketed for infants under 6 months of age. Some countries regulate this, others do not, but it is the accepted worldwide recommendation for infant feeding.
The German authorities do not regulate this issue. I wish they would. So Nestle is not breaking a law in Germany, it is just going against the advice of the most respected authorities on infant feeding in the world. However, what Nestle is doing is lying about its business practices. That is the key point I was trying to make in this post. Nestle has said that it supports the WHO’s International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes and that it has changed the label’s on its baby food products worldwide to reflect the 6 month recommendation. Apparently, that is not the case, since its German products and German websites still say 4 months. Not only is Nestle not falling in line with international guidelines, but it is also lying about it.
The closest you can get to official rules in baby feeding is this:
http://www.fke-do.de/content.php?seite=seiten/inhalt.php&details=60
Note that it says “breastfeeding as long as mother and child wish” in the upper part of the diagram. This has only been inserted a few years ago thanks to the AFS (www.afs-stillen.de). Until then breastfeeding ended at the 1st birthday.
Marketing first foods as suitable from 4 months is pretty much standard for all the big name brands in the UK – Heinz does it for eg. Boycotts should be consistent in my view if you are going to do them. There is no point focusing only on Nestle which just leaves all the other companies free to carry on with the same practices without any attention on them. The others have been able to get away without being questioned for a long time.
Betty M:
Nestle is not the only company that I write about. For example, I mentioned Heinz here and here. I mentioned Enfamil, Similac and others here, here and here.
Nestle is, however, the largest company of them all, the one with the highest number of WHO Code violations, and the only one that has lied directly to me. I do, however, try to avoid buying products from all of these companies when I can.
this is absolutely disgusting. i hadn’t previously realized how terrible Nestle actually is. i’m ready to boycott now.
Thanks for the links. I came here today via a tweet so havent had a chance to go through your archives.
I never have bought Nestle’s baby food here in Canada (and never plan to) but I decided to look at the labelling at the grocery store today, just to see how it reads. Yes, the stage 1 labels state 6 months + but then why do they have “N” labels for new beginners? While they are “technically” not advocating starting before 6 months, it is obvious they are pushing the “N” for before 6 months. Especially when their Canadian website has introducing cereal between months 4 – 5:
http://www.nestle-baby.ca/en/baby/4-5months/feeding_baby/Introducing_cereal.htm (which I’m sure you have seen before).
What a crappy company!
Rae: Yeah. They are purposely vague on that starter food in Canada. I also examined their Canada and US websites when I first wrote about this issue.
Wow you really just have too much time on your hands if your goal in life is to bring Nestle down. I think you just need to find a new hobby. Good for you on breastfeeding your kid until they graduate college, why do you feel the need to knock everyone else down? Feed your children the way you want to and let others feed the way they want to.
Betty Boop:
My goals in life are many, but a lot of them focus around social justice. Part of that includes corporate social responsibility and ensuring that companies act in an ethical manner. Continuing to try to find ways to convince moms that they cannot breastfeed, that they should give up, that they need to supplement, or that they need to start giving other foods earlier than recommended by the leading health authorities in the world, AND THEN LYING ABOUT IT, is extremely unethical.
This isn’t about how I feed my child or how anyone else feed’s their child. It is about ensuring that companies like Nestle do not deceive and lie to mothers.
And when that food is found to be tainted, or full of things you don’t want or didn’t think was in your food, and you say, why didn’t anyone say anything? Remember this moment, Betty Boop. Not all of us are blind consumers simply accepting everything corporations tell us at face value.
thank goodness for people like phdinparenting who care not only for the welfare of her own children, but for the welfare of all children. thank you, phd, for continuing to put pressure on companies such as nestle so that they don’t mislead parents and put children at risk all in the name of the almighty $ (or deutschmark).
that just disgusts me. wtf, nestle??!!
In fact, the current European law (unfortunately) allows baby food manufacturers to label their products as being appropriate from 4 months, despite the WHO Code. That’s why you will find the same food labelled as being appropriate as of 4 months in Europe but as of 6 MONTHS in countries in Africa. Mind-boggling isn’t it?
Disgusting. I just don’t understand how anyone can believe anything Nestle says. Thanks for the good reporting.
I’m a little confused by this. I know are WHO guidelines for advertising and promoting baby foods but is having that product on the shelf for sale in a store really the same as running an ad for it? I don’t think so. I also wonder if Germany has laws/rules/guidelines that are different from the UN’s? And finally is Nestle the only baby food company creating food for children 4-6 months of age? I gabbed a box of Beech Nut Rice cereal from my pantry and the label says “cereal from about 4 months” how is that better/worse than what you’re seeing for sale in Germany? Finally, say you are a mom who chooses/can’t breast feed your child and doesn’t want to make your own baby food – how do you know what to buy to feed your child if the age guidelines aren’t on the package? I don’t work for a baby food company. I studied the baby food being pushed in the 3rd world problem as a case study in college before the UN and WHO created the guidelines. I was very happy when they did. My only experience with buying baby food is to use it to make food and treats for my dog who has food allergies so my guidelines and experience with it are totally different than if I had a real human child. That’s why I’m asking a bunch of questions.
Condo Blues:
There are two issues here:
1) The WHO (not the UN) and other major health bodies around the world agree that infants should be given nothing but breast milk (or infant formula) until they are 6 months of age. As a result, the WHO guidelines say that no food or drink can be marketed for babies under 6 months of age. That would include labeling on the products, information on their website, or advertising in the media. The only approved alternative to breast milk prior to 6 months is infant formula and it can be sold, but not advertised/promoted. These are international guidelines that some, but not all, countries have made into law. It is not law in Germany, Canada or the United States.
2) Despite it not being law, Nestle says it agrees with the WHO resolution that no complementary foods (e.g. baby food) should be given to babies under 6 months of age. It said that it had changed the labels on its food worldwide to reflect the 6 month recommendation. However, it obviously lied about that fact since its labels very clearly still mention that these foods are for babies under 6 months of age. That was the key point of this post. It is already obvious that Nestle goes against the WHO recommendations and does so around the world. However, it claimed that in this instance it WAS following their recommendations. However, it is not.
Sorry…just realized I didn’t directly answer your question. It is not a problem for companies to indicate an age on baby food. It should just NEVER say anything under 6 months. Whether the baby is breastfed (which is ideal) or gets infant formula, no other food or drink should be introduced until 6 months.
Also, for what it’s worth, moms who do not want to make baby food and don’t want to buy commercial baby food ,can just give their babies (as of 6 months) small, soft pieces of regular food. No need for baby food at all. It is a convenience product.
I agree that if Nestle said that it changed it’s food labels to indicate 6 months and above in all countries that they sell it in than that’s what the label should say. But a quick Google search on my part showed that there were many differing professional opinions on whether a child should eat something other than breast milk or formula starting at either 4 months or 6 months. I think that decision (or not) should be up to the child’s parents and health professionals. This may be why this isn’t regulated or a law in the US, Canada or Germany like The Globetrotter Parent said in her comment.
A picky point (can’t help it. At one time I considered working for the UN and know a lot about it.) The World Health Organization (WHO) is part of the United Nations (UN.) It can pass resolutions that are recommendations that member countries may choose to follow – some countries do not. Since membership in the UN is voluntary, unfortunately complying with its resolutions and those of it’s subcommittees like the WHO is also voluntary. And just like any in member country’s political infrastructure sometimes UN resolutions are passed purely based on internal politics.
The WHO infant formula guidelines and recommendations (again, all voluntary to follow with no penalty for not following them except for another member country saying something about it during a meeting) where initially passed to protect the largely illiterate populations in third world countries who did not have ready access to the information and tools to do their own research on how, what, when, and why they could consider breast feeding vs. formula for their children often with dire results when mothers tried to water down the formula to make it last. These women didn’t have ready access to the information that they shouldn’t do this under any circumstances because so many of them couldn’t read it or they misinterpreted the pictures on the packaging/ad. Tragic because just because these parents may not read doesn’t mean that they don’t love their children any less than someone who can.
This may be another reason why you may find the same food being labeled as appropriate for 4 – 6 months in Europe, the US and Canada but labeled as appropriate for 6 months in countries in Africa.
I also agree with you that moms who don’t want to buy commercial baby food can just puree or smash soft pieces of regular food. Although I will give you that buying baby food in a jar is convenient that’s why I use it for a totally different purpose.
Condo Blues:
The reason that there are many differing professional opinions on whether a child should have anything other than breastmilk (or alternatively formula) before 6 months is that the recommendation changed not that long ago and it takes a LONG time for governments, health professionals, etc. to change their approaches. The World Health Assembly changed its recommendation in 2001. Health Canada, after reviewing the WHA resolution and doing its own analysis of existing research, updated its recommendation in 2004. In the United States, the American Academy of Pediatrics updated its policy in 2005.
There is a lot more information on other world health organizations that support this recommendation and the reasons behind it on the kellymom website’s page on introducing solids.
I agree that the WHO infant formula recommendations were initially passed to protect babies in third world countries from the unethical actions of formula companies. However, the issue of when to introduce solid foods is related primarily to the increased chance of gastrointestinal infections, which is something that affects both populations in the developing and the developed world. There is no good reason to give your baby anything but breastmilk (or alternatively formula) before the 6 month mark. The only reasons for doing so would be ignorance of the new recommendations, corporate profit or parents impatience (i.e. can’t wait to see their kid eat stuff).
Wow. Let’s see how the list of huge corporations we can’t trust — Nestle, BP, Halliburton, pretty much everyone on the financial sector. Maybe I should start writing them all down, especially when they testify in front of Congress about what good citizens they all try to be. ‘Cause they are citizens now, according to the Supreme Court. Yeah, they’re on my list, too.
The day you wrote this article, is the day we went back to the US after visiting the Netherlands for a few weeks. I encountered the same thing in te grocery stores there when trying to find some babyfood for my 8 month old. Not only did I see the Nestle products you display above, but there were plenty of jars from the storebrand (largest chain in Holland) with “4+” on it as well. It was nearly impossible to find cereal without cow’s milk in it as well.
Honestly though – at least they are straightforward. In the US, sneakier tactics are used… Stage 1 for ‘supported sitters’ anyone? Plenty of babies can sit ‘supported’ before 4 months, and pediatricians do not shy away from telling parents to start introducing ‘first foods’ between the ages fo 4 and 5 months.
I could send you pics of the jars if you would like.
By the way, are WHO guidelines (no food should be marketed for ages under 6 months) binding?