Advanced search

To be funding it hard to bite my tongue re weaning

(117 Posts)
HugeFloweryPants Wed 20-Mar-13 22:43:39

I accepted a long time ago that a friend and I parent differently and am quite happy with that, horses for courses. I breastfeed and go with the flow and she's a routine queen with 4 hour bottles etc. BUT I'm finding it hard to bite my tongue now we're on our second babies regarding weaning, she's well informed/ educated but has a big baby that 'needs' early weaning...but it's taken to extremes...
7/8 weeks baby rice
8 weeks rusks at bed time (trying to keep 4 hrs between bottles)
now 10 weeks
morning: eg porridge powder stuff
dinner: eg powdered meal by heinz (not seen but described)
tea: rusk

...and today exclaiming he's dropped a few centiles

I know I lentil weave a tad...but give me perspecrive, surely this is outside the norm and not a good idea? Mine would have been unfeedable then due to tongue thrusting.Or am I just not used to this as I've never bought ready made baby food?

YouTheCat Thu 21-Mar-13 09:44:11

There's a vast chasm of difference between locking a child in a cellar and weaning early though. confused

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 09:46:17

I don't care what people did 30 years ago, it's irrelevant. The 'it didn't do me any harm' rational is ridiculous and certainly shouldn't be used as an excuse.

My Mum used to put my carrycot on the back seat of the car. Doesn't mean I'd do the same.

I don't understand why people ignore guidelines (I know they're only guidelines). But if someone tells me that this is best for my baby based on the latest research and evidence, why would you ignore it?

I do feel though, that as a health professional I need to promote the latest advice. Doesn't mean I agree when people choose to do their own thing.

sweetiepie1979 Thu 21-Mar-13 09:47:27

Sorry, to say something. Don't say anything, it's. Ot your place.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 09:47:54

The obvious danger at that age would be choking.

Snowfedup Thu 21-Mar-13 09:48:52

Just googled the EAT study , that's really interesting and makes sense to me:

Since the 1970s allergy has increased significantly in the UK: a study in South Wales showed that asthma rates doubled and eczema rates tripled between 1973 and 1988. Two successive studies from the Isle of Wight undertaken in 1989 and then 1994-1996 suggested that peanut allergy had doubled. These increases have coincided with a two-thirds reduction in early introduction of complementary foods. Therefore, it is possible that later introduction could promote food allergies. So the question is – is early introduction an effective approach or not to prevent food allergy in young children?

I realise its only anecdotal but my only friend who completely and totally avoided nuts when pregnant has a child with a peanut allergy and low and behold the advice about this has now changed !

LtEveDallas Thu 21-Mar-13 09:49:52

Myself and all 4 of my siblings were weaned 'early' as per the guidlines way back then. All 5 of us suffer from stomach and bowel complaints. DSD was also weaned early (10 weeks) and she too is suffering - which is devastating and embarassing for a 17 year old.

As a result of all the family ills, I investigated prior to having DD and came to the decision that she would be EBF, then weaned according to current guidlines (6 months), food was treated as 'fun' for the next 6 months and BLW (although I hadn't heard of it then!) was the way ahead. The only food I avoided was honey, and DD only ever ate what we were eating. I was lucky in that I was able to BF without many issues, and I really do think that helped - yes DD was a nightmare sleeper, but it is amazing what you can get used to when you have to!

DD is a very healthy little girl and I am hoping that what we chose to do will help to protect her against suffering like the rest of her family. We can only wait and see. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I did it for the best of intentions, rather than for me.

stargirl1701 Thu 21-Mar-13 09:53:04

I was weaned at 12 weeks. I have eczema, asthma, hay fever and IBS.

babanouche Thu 21-Mar-13 10:00:12

Snowfedup, that's really interesting but equally there could be other factors involved ie the decline in breastfeeding and uptake in formula feeding, increase in central heating, increasing amounts of chemicals in everything around us and the spread of certain non-native foodstuffs. Also a small chance of diagnosis where previously there was none and people just lived with it.

Snowfedup Thu 21-Mar-13 10:01:47

Maybe though its really more about generics and family history ?

eavesdropping Thu 21-Mar-13 10:03:02

She's clearly not well informed if she started weaning at 7 weeks <shudders>

Anybody well-informed will know that 17 weeks is an ABSOLUTE MINIMUM and 6 months is preferable.

What used to happen 5 / 15 / 50 years ago is irrelevant - research has moved on. Not every baby weaned early will suffer ill effects - same as not every smoker will die an early death. Doesn't mean the risks aren't there though. Early weaning is associated with obesity, diabetes, allergies and digestive problems later in life.

As to whether you should say anything or not...I don't know. Depends on how she would take it I guess. Weaning that stupidly early though, I think I would find it hard to bite my tongue.

Pobblewhohasnotoes Thu 21-Mar-13 10:04:55

babanouche Thu 21-Mar-13 10:00:12
Snowfedup, that's really interesting but equally there could be other factors involved ie the decline in breastfeeding and uptake in formula feeding, increase in central heating, increasing amounts of chemicals in everything around us and the spread of certain non-native foodstuffs. Also a small chance of diagnosis where previously there was none and people just lived with it.

I guess there are a lot of variables that can't be controlled.

I think people worry too much about centile charts. Babies do go up and down in their weight, they also have growth spurts and suddenly wake up for feeds more often. They just need more milk for a bit, it doesn't mean they need rusks at 8 weeks old. Which are also packed full of sugar.

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:07:19

I guess it's up to her.

many of my generation were weaned at 6 weeks. not saying it's right, but am sure she's had all the relevant leaflets etc from HV. It's her choice.

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:09:49

I suppose you could ask her ie: "didn't you get the leaflet you fecking idiot, my HV says x,y,z - what does yours say...etc etc"

Losingexcessweight Thu 21-Mar-13 10:19:47


I have a dd who's just turned 5 months, she's not weaning, and to be honest I don't really want to wean at 6 months, I'd much rather wait till around 7 months as I think it must be better for her insides to be weaned at say 7 months than younger etc.

I mentioned this to the health visitor at the weighing clinic yesterday who told me I couldn't delay it and it had to be 6 months.

I think I ll decided at 6 months whether I want to delay it another month etc.

However on fb recently there are babies afew weeks younger than dd, And people were posting pics of their baby at 3 months old sat in high chairs, toy cars, eating food etc.

I silently disapprove to myself but would never comment on these posts or pictures on fb. Everyone parents differently and as long as you are doing the right thing then that's all that matters

SuffolkNWhat Thu 21-Mar-13 10:20:36

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

gnushoes Thu 21-Mar-13 10:22:11

I don't see why, if she is telling you her son is slipping down the centile charts, that it's wrong for you to remind her that milk has more calories than the weaning foods and that's why the advice is not to change the diet till six months. It's factual. I would hope a friend would do that for me -- we all do daft things sometimes, and she simply may not be making the connection.

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:25:46

i knew a paediatrician who weaned her children at 4 months. She's looked at the evidence and decided that was an appropriate time.

I weaned mine at 5 months when they were about 17/18 pounds and started them on plain fruit purees

they don't appear to have grown horns yet

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:29:01

ubik your posts contradict themselves.


Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:30:23

losing don't worry.

You would be in good company in the US.

As I said earlier, the first year is supposed to be an introduction to eating! smile

ConfuzzledMummy Thu 21-Mar-13 10:32:10

Keep your nose out, its not your child yabu.

Losingexcessweight Thu 21-Mar-13 10:32:42

Good company in the US?

ubik Thu 21-Mar-13 10:33:45

I think there's a difference between weaning your baby at 8 weeks and weaning them at 4 months.

I'm not endorsing weaning at 6 weeks - but many babies were with no ill-effects. I don't see leaving weaning as late as poss as some badge of honour - many people wean from 4 months onwards.

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:34:07

losing most Mums start the way you are describing.

Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:35:08

I mean its not even suggested that one weans before 6 months.


Feminine Thu 21-Mar-13 10:37:20

Thing is, ill effects are not always seen in the early years.

Its too smug to think that just because your child seems fine at 8, that early weaning was a good idea.

Many problems present in adulthood.

Another thing to worry about I guess wink

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now