Baby-led weaning: A solid approach to infant nutrition

 

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• New CSU research shows infants following baby-led weaning grow at the same pace as those following conventional weaning.
• The scientific assessment is the first of its kind and provides evidence that baby-led weaning could support healthy growth and development.
• The study addresses worry among many parents and caregivers about a weaning approach that has been popularized in part by social media.

When it’s time to add solid food to a baby’s diet, is it best to spoon feed purées – the conventional approach – or to allow the baby to feed herself soft finger foods?

The second path, called baby-led weaning, has exploded in popularity in the past decade, yet many parents and caregivers worry about whether it results in healthy growth or could have negative effects.

Colorado State University nutritionists are settling the question, with implications for an untold number of babies. The researchers assessed 150 infants from the age of 6 months to 1 year to compare baby-led weaning and a typical puréed weaning diet and found that babies in the two groups acquired similar calories and nutrition and grew at the same pace.

The study is the first to correlate dietary and growth data and to scientifically compare growth outcomes from the two weaning approaches. It did not assess specific health indicators, but findings suggest healthy growth and development are attainable if baby-led weaning relies on a variety of healthy foods.

 “These findings reassure parents and caregivers that babies following baby-led weaning grow at the same rate as babies following conventional weaning,” said Minghua Tang, a professor and the Lillian Fountain Smith Endowed Chair in Nutrition in CSU’s Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition.

Tang and her doctoral student, Kinzie Matzeller, conducted the research with colleagues at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus and published their findings June 24 in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

“Baby-led weaning is so popular, but we didn’t have that much research-based evidence about whether it was superior to conventional weaning or whether it might do harm,” Tang said. “These findings are helping fill a gap by showing that babies following baby-led weaning grow at the same trajectory as those weaned with spoon feeding.”

It’s rewarding to provide parents and caregivers with evidence-based information rather than anecdotes, Matzeller said.

“I feel a relief to be able to rely on research and optimistic that parents might not have to worry about healthy growth if they opt for baby-led weaning,” she said.

Proponents of baby-led weaning, including social media influencers, note that the approach encourages babies to eat the same foods their families eat; to regulate their intake based on hunger cues, which can lead to healthy, long-term eating habits; and to improve fine-motor skills, which boost neurological development.

There are important caveats that make baby-fed weaning successful, Tang said. Among them: Babies must be developmentally ready to feed themselves, must eat sufficiently soft foods cut into small pieces to avoid choking and must be offered a healthy diet.

Solid food is typically introduced when a baby is about 6 months old, when the infant is still ingesting breast milk or formula to meet most of her nutritional needs. By age 10 months to 1 year, most babies get about half their nutrition from solid foods, Tang said.

The new study has several distinctive aspects:

• It specifically defined baby-led weaning as relying on less than 10 percent puréed foods, rather than depending on general descriptions from parents and caregivers.
• It analyzed dietary records to pinpoint calories and nutrition consumed per day.
• It linked dietary intake with growth data each month of the study to understand and compare the effects of baby-fed weaning and conventional weaning.

This quantitative, or data-based, dietary assessment yielded objective findings that parents and caregivers may rely upon when making weaning decisions.

Although baby-led weaning has surged in popularity in recent years, it reflects the way most families fed babies before processed food became a norm, Matzeller noted. Now, blended baby food is commonly available in jars and pouches.

The baby-led weaning study is an outgrowth of a larger research project Tang leads called the Maternal and Infant Nutrition Trial, an 18-month investigation into how different protein-rich foods affect growth and gut health in babies. The trial is funded by the National Institutes of Health.

---

Journal

Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics

DOI

10.1016/j.jand.2026.156376 

Currently approved mRNA vaccines are safe and effective

• A comprehensive new review that assessed billions of doses of currently approved mRNA vaccines affirms that these vaccines provide protection against COVID-19, including severe COVID-19, across diverse populations, including children, pregnant women, and immunocompromised people. Booster doses extended and strengthened protection for existing SARS-CoV-2 subvariants through May 2023.
• The review reinforces existing evidence that mRNA vaccines are safe; serious adverse events are rare and substantially outweighed by protection against severe disease, hospitalisation, and death.
• The review also highlights that mRNA technologies have potential future uses for vaccines against influenza, RSV, and other infectious diseases, as well as for personalised cancer vaccines and RNA-based therapeutics.
• The authors emphasise the importance of equitable access, strengthened and expanded manufacturing to low- and middle-income countries, and advanced storage and distribution for mRNA vaccines.
• The authors also call for continued clear communication about mRNA vaccine safety and effectiveness to sustain public trust, improve vaccine uptake worldwide, and address ongoing misinformation about mRNA vaccines.

A comprehensive new review published in The Lancet affirms that currently approved mRNA vaccines are safe and highly effective at preventing infectious diseases, including COVID-19. The new review also suggests that mRNA vaccine technologies have potential as new options for treating and preventing other health conditions and diseases, including influenza, RSV, cancer, and autoimmune conditions.
 
Through detailed analysis of published data from laboratory research, clinical trials, and real-world surveillance of billions of mRNA vaccine doses, the authors assessed the science behind mRNA vaccines and their public health impact.
 
The review concludes that serious adverse side effects from mRNA vaccines remain exceedingly rare. For example, in real world surveillance, incidents of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart-related inflammation) following vaccination were higher among second-dose recipients, with rates of roughly 12.6 cases per million for Pfizer BioNTech’s BNT162b2 vaccine and about 35.6 cases per million for Moderna’s mRNA-1273. Importantly, the increased risk of myocarditis and pericarditis from mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, particularly in males aged 12-19, was significantly lower than the risk of developing myocarditis or pericarditis from a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Other serious adverse events were also very rare. For example, the risk of anaphylaxis was 4.7 cases per million doses (Pfizer), and Guilain Barre Syndrome was 38 cases per million doses (AstraZeneca) [see table]. Most other side effects, such as sore arms, fatigue, or fever, were mild to moderate and subsided after a few days.
 
The analysis found that across various clinical trials and real-world data, mRNA vaccines are about 87% effective against any documented SARS‑CoV‑2 infection, 93% effective against hospitalisation, and 94% effective against mortality within 14–42 days after vaccination. Effectiveness waned over time and, in some analyses, was reduced by age and against the Omicron lineage (67% against infection and 72% against hospitalisation), but booster doses helped restore protection. Ongoing surveillance and real‑world monitoring continue to support the vaccines’ tolerability and effectiveness as new variants emerge, and booster programs are implemented to maintain protection.
 
“Our comprehensive review provides compelling evidence confirming that approved mRNA vaccines are safe and highly effective. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, mRNA vaccines demonstrated what rapid, science-driven collaboration can achieve by delivering safe, effective protection at an unprecedented scale. The key lessons from mRNA vaccine use during the COVID-19 pandemic are not only about manufacturing speed, but about the importance of sharing safety data, conducting ongoing rigorous real-world surveillance, and providing clear information about how new types of vaccines work and why they protect communities," said lead study author Dr Anna Blakney of the University of British Columbia (Canada).
 
mRNA platforms for future disease prevention and treatment
 
mRNA vaccines deliver genetic instructions to human cells to manufacture harmless viral proteins that train the immune system to recognise and fight the real virus. This process is temporary and ends once the body has learned to defend itself; it does not change a person’s DNA. The first FDA-approved mRNA vaccines were introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic [1], building upon decades of research to quickly scale up approval, production, and distribution.
 
Beyond COVID-19, the authors emphasise the versatility of the mRNA platform. Efforts are underway to develop vaccines against influenza, RSV, and other infectious diseases, as well as personalised cancer vaccines and RNA-based therapeutics (see figure 2 for trials underway). This breadth of potential applications signals a future in which mRNA technology could be tailored to individual patients and specific disease threats, offering rapid, flexible, and effective tools for public health.
 
“As the world continues to confront evolving infectious threats, our review underscores the need for sustained innovation, robust surveillance, and true global collaboration to maximise the life-saving benefits of this groundbreaking technology. mRNA vaccines have already transformed how we respond to emerging diseases, and with ongoing innovation and rigorous safety monitoring, they can drive progress in preventive medicine and cancer treatment for years to come,” said co-author Dr Manish Sadarangani of the University of British Columbia and BC Children’s Hospital Research Institute (Canada).
 
Expanding global access and equity
 
The authors also highlight that improvements in mRNA vaccine formulation and distribution enhance access and equity, as higher-temperature storage extends shelf life and lowers costs, broadening distribution.

Because mRNA vaccines are based on a common platform and can be adjusted to new targets much faster than other vaccine platforms, the manufacturing process is scalable and tightly controlled to keep the RNA pure and effective. Across the supply chain, vaccines are kept in specialised freezers and temperature-controlled settings, and newer storage options, such as higher-temperature storage and freeze-drying, are helping more vaccines reach remote places quickly and reduce waste. This combination helped speed up COVID-19 vaccine development and distribution.
 
"Expanding manufacturing capacity and ensuring equitable access in low- and middle-income countries is essential if mRNA vaccines are to fulfill their promise as a global public good. By investing in technology transfer, local production, and robust regulatory systems, we can shorten supply chains, reduce costs, and ensure that people everywhere benefit from safe, effective vaccines beyond pandemics," said co-author Dr Robin Shattock of Imperial College London (UK).
 
The authors note the importance of ongoing post-licensure safety monitoring and long-term follow-up to study post-marketing real-world performance of existing licensed mRNA vaccines. They also emphasise the importance of documenting all instances of side effects, no matter how rare, as some signals might be missed or misinterpreted in real-world observational studies. Additional study limitations include that the review’s findings come from many different countries and programs, so results may vary by population, vaccine product, and how safety data are collected. Finally, the ongoing evolution of viruses means that effectiveness might change with new variants.
 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(26)00512-X/fulltext