Would you put them back on formula

Enfamil has a new formula called 'Enfagrow' for 10 mos - 36 mos, a whole year longer then the Next Step which goes to 24 months.

This one is also vanilla flavored, so it doesn't have that 'formula' taste for developing little tastebuds.

I'm considering putting my 2.5 year olds back on it. They stayed on regular formula until 16 months, did whole milk for 2 then went to Soy/Lactaid combo for lactose intollerance... Now that this is out..

I didn't mind at all giving them formula beyond a year (that's why they make next step to begin with) I think formula has WAAAY more nutritional value then whole milk, and this new stuff is also packed with DHA, something that whole milk (especially lactaid) lacks. At least in that quantity.


I know I will keep my son on some form of formula/Breastmilk until he's 3 (14 months now) to avoid the whole lactose intollerance that his sisters developed (and oddly enough, they could handle milk-based formula, just not cows milk,ice cream, etc.) he is on lactaid formula right now and has been since I stopped nursing him (I still pump for his daycare milk)

I'm talking strictly from a nutritional standpoint, not cost. If cost were not an issue, would you consider putting your kids back on Formula?

 

I didn't with my first son but I think that I will with my twins. If cost becomes an issue I will still give it to them once or twice a day for the extra nutritional boost.

 

If cost were not an issue, I would give my kids the most nutritionally beneficial option. This stuff sounds pretty good, so I would probably consider it, and probably would have more seriously considered it if there were a non-dairy version (my boys are allergic). I give my kids vitamins, so this is just a different way to deliver many of the same nutrients. I think it's a nice option for people who would prefer to give their kids a drink rather than chewable vitamins/supplements.

 

If the AAP came out with a study that showed major benefits to keeping a child on formula past one year, I might consider it. But as of now, no.

Kids older than 1 can get everything they need from eating whole foods, plus maybe a multivitamin. In fact, our pediatrician suggested that the more milk/formula they drink, the less food they'll eat, which you don't want.

As for DHA -- we use a fish oil supplement called Coromega that comes in little packets. It tastes like orange sherbet, and all of my kids love it. We've been using it since they turned 1, actually. (Before that they got DHA through my breast milk, since I take supplements, too.) It has high levels of omega 3's -- one packet is equivalent to swallowing two adult capsules of fish oil. The amount you'll find in any formula is tiny compared to that.

Also, I can't help but be skeptical of formula manufacturers. It's smart business for Enfamil to come out with a product that convinces people they need to buy formula for three years.

 

Totally agree with Becca.

I would only consider something like this as a supplement for an extremely picky eater who simply would not get adequate calories/nutrition otherwise. In any other case, I think it's just marketing.

 

I agree with Becca and Holly. I think it's a marketing scheme myself. Actually I think the Next Step formula is marketing too. If you really want them to have the DHA, there is milk fortified with it, and you can also buy supplements.

 

That's a money making scheme for the formula manufacturers. In fact, the 'next step' formulas from 9- whatever months are the SAME as the infant formula!! It's just a label that convinces people to buy it for older kids!! I'm sure it's the same for the new one.

No WAY! I waited FOREVER to stop the formula! NO WAY Jose!

Also, the reason you go from whole milk to 2% at age 2 is so they can get most nutrients etc from SOLID food!! That's your goal. To go back to formula would be a total regression for me.

If you have a FTT child, perhaps it would make sense but otherwise.. I wouldn't do it!!

 

I would talk to your Pedi.

I would not do it unless it was suggested to me by a dr.

1. TOO much dairy/milk/formula in an older child can prevent them from consuming more 'food' (versus drink) and actually prevent a wide variety of nutritional variety.
2. Supplemental add-in are not as good as the 'real' deal once your kids are old enough to consume them. Vitamins and supplements are great if needed, but getting them from food is better (that said we do vitamins since I have skinny DDs and is was suggested to use by PEDI)
3. Check--the 'vanilla' flavor and other types may have extra sugar and sweetners that are not in milk
4.mostly it is VERY expensive option. Our Pedi has us add Ovaltine to milk. Flavors it and adds extra vitamins w/o the cost.
5.Mostly a marketing ploy--you can get all those nutrional values from food at that age, barring any unusual circumstances (in that case, many insurances will pick up part of the cost and/or you qualify for other formulas/add-ins)

Just my 2 cents though!! We looked into it a lot since I had/have one DD that has had a history of eating problems and feeding therapy. We wanted to do all we could to get weight and healthy eating habits instilled in her. Both the Feeding Therapist and the PEDI said no to the 'toddler formulas' for us and our case.

FWIW---my DD w/o the feeding issues is lactose intolerant. We use lactaid for her (whole milk version) and have had no problems with it. She is healthier than her twin (who was on predigested speciality enhanced formula as an infant)

 

You all make a good, valid point as to the marketing scheme, however, I should point out one MAJOR mis-understanding:

1) I am NOT trying to give formula to REPLACE solid foods. By no means. What I meant by using it to replace MILK was as a drink WITH their meal, not IN PLACE of their meal. That would mean only about 2-3 oz. with every other meal (Breakast, lunch, with juice for morning snack/dinner and water with afternoon snack)

The girls did this until they were 16 months old and ate everything in sight. They are much pickier eaters now, living mainly on mac 'n' cheese (homemade) and chicken nuggets, which is why I was considering adding this back in. Simply becuase, as a side by side comparison, Formula is more nutritious for them then milk is. However, I like the idea of adding Ovaltine to their milk, but wouldn't that also be adding un-needed sugar???

BECCA: Where do you buy your Omega supplements at?? We've tried giving the girls our fish oil supplements with obiously negative affects. We only gave it to them cuz they ASKED and they of course bit into it... pretty funny face but they won't take it now. That would be awesome to get them something they could take with mommy and Daddy.... And the flavor might entice mommy to take her supplements more regularly too...

 

I order them from luckyvitamin.com, which has good prices:

http://www.luckyvitamin.com/item/itemKey/61976

But, you can also find them at Whole Foods, Natural Foods Warehouse, etc.

If you don't think that formula intake would decrease their appetites, then there's really no harm in continuing formula -- but again, I don't think they need it. The main reason to drink milk after age 1 is for the calcium -- and kids this age need only about 16 oz. of total dairy per day to fulfill calcium requirements *if* they're not getting any from leafy green veggies, etc.

Formula really only adds vitamins -- so I'd side on giving regular milk, plus a multivitamin.

 

For the Ovaltine---I control the amount since it is a powder and we use less than suggested (so less sugar too) rather than portioned amounts in toddler formula.

For Omega---Some companies make a chewable vitamin w/ Omega. It is a gummy vitamin. My girls do the regular (w/o omega) and the fiber gummies. LOVE THEM! Walgreens carries them. They do have gelatin in them (just so you know) if you are a vegetarian.


As for the solid foods point: as long as you did the same amount of formula as you would milk. Although ounce for ounce the formula may be 'percieved' as a food more than milk and/or be higher in calories. I know we used Pediasure for a while and when we did, the solid food intake dropped sharply since my DDs body percieved it as food, even though we gave her the same amount as we would have with regular milk (am and pm--2-4 oz).

 

No because we do not even do milk at home anymore. They were getting their daily recomendation At daycare so we do drinkable yogurt at night(4oz). It's so much nicer and I would have done it earlier if I knew they'd take to it so well. The yogurt is vitamin enriched.

 

No, I still wouldn't, for the same reasons Becca and KC mentioned. Just give them a vitamin if you are really worried about it. Most kids around that stage start eating less and get picky. I also get the gummy Omega 3 vitamins. You can also do some things to add veggies, like pureed pumpkin or butternut squash mixed in with pancake batter, shredded zucchini in pasta sauce, stuff like that.

ETA - I also don't understand how keeping your DS on formula till age 3 will avoid lactose intolerance?

 

I did some pediasure when we went through some times where I felt like DD was losing weight, but other than that my DD will drink milk instead of food if I let her so I wouldn't. That's just me. I do think that some of the PP's made EXCELLENT points that I agree with!!!!

 

No, I would not. I think formula past a year, of any sort, is just a marketing thing for the formula makers.

 

I don't know that I will do it THAT long (I know I said I would) but it will be longer, seeing that he is 14 months and we haven't stopped yet. His sisters became lactose intollerant 2 months after starting whole milk (they started at 14 months and became lactose intollerant at 16 months) I don't know why or how since they were on milk based formula to begin with, but they did. Anything milk or cheese related set them off for a long time, we are slowly workin things back in to see what they can tolerate.

And we are slowly working dairy/cheese/milk products in with my son's diet, with milk being the LAST thing that we will try.


I do agree though after doing some research (and quite frankly not knowing about them) that I will start all my kids on a chewable Omega 3 supplement. I didn't know they made them for kids, I wish I had known a LOT sooner.

FWIW though - I saw some of this new formula in the store the other day and compared it to the infant formula. While I do agree that next stage is nutritionaly exactly the same as infant formula, the toddler formula does differ. It's got about 4 times the amount of calcium, less magnesium and less of a couple other nutrients...

 

My guys are super skinny, so I'm always trying to find healthy ways to fatten them up; I just looked online at the nutrition facts for Ovaltine vs Carnation Instant Breakfast mix (Classic French Vanilla), and the Carnation has less sugar and more nutrients (vitamins and minerals) per gram.

Just FYI!

(Edited for grammar.)

 

I'd consider breastfeeding them until 36 months much more readily

 

Enfagrow is not new. My girls drank Enfagrow from 13 months to 24 months. We do not have "fresh milk" here so my milk choices are ultrapasterized milk in a box, or raw milk that farmers on motorbikes sell door to door in the mornings. For that reason I chose to go with the formula. I also breast feed them until 15 months but those last two months were a gradual wean.

 

We have been using Enfagrow since they turned 1 and are still on it. they get 6 oz in the morning when they wake up and 4 oz before bed at night. They have started drinking milk (the ultrapasteurized kind in a box ) sporadically (at mealtime) in the last month or so, but to tell the truth, i like the fact that when they have those days where they don't eat much at all, i can just plunk 8 oz of formula and know they're getting some sort of nutrition....i figure it's more "fortified" than cow's milk (in a box).