Talk

Advanced search

Why do jars of puree still say on them 'Suitable from 4 months.'

(18 Posts)
flubdub Mon 07-Jul-08 14:09:15

I noticed the other day. I didnt think solid were suitable for 4 month old?

andiem Mon 07-Jul-08 14:10:05

so they can make money from the unconverted grin

OverMyDeadBody Mon 07-Jul-08 14:13:21

because technically they are suitable from four months, and they still want to make money from parents who want to wean early!grin

donnie Mon 07-Jul-08 14:14:54

lots of parents start their babies on purees at 4 months.

girlandboy Mon 07-Jul-08 14:16:09

My dh was weaned at 6 weeks according to mil. I bet he could hardly even hold his head up!!

andiem Mon 07-Jul-08 14:18:07

we know donnnie but that's not what the guidelines say and the babyfood manufacturers luurve the fact that lots of people start at 4 months and also that they feed purees cos they make loads of dosh from it and if people followed the guidelines and did blw then they would be out of business

or just mushed up a carrot themselves instead of buying mushed up carrot in a jar

OverMyDeadBody Mon 07-Jul-08 14:20:54

they are a business andiem, of course they want to make money. What's wrong with that?

andiem Mon 07-Jul-08 14:32:46

because it taps into people's insecurities about feeding babies that's why
because they know the guidance is 6 months and they now say on their packets doh guuidance is 6 months but for people who choose to wean earlier then this food is suitable from 4 months blah blah blah
because it is cheaper and easier to mush your own food if that is what you want to do
or give them a piece of toast if that is what you want to do

deanychip Mon 07-Jul-08 14:33:30

to sell um!
tis bIG money!!

constancereader Mon 07-Jul-08 14:35:02

I think they have to change the labels at some point in the future. They won the right to extend the changeover period.

I don't know where I read this though, it could be wishful thinking/imagination on my part!

lulumama Mon 07-Jul-08 14:35:49

no, that is true, constancereader.

flubdub Mon 07-Jul-08 14:40:44

girlandboy - I know two lunatics people (a grandma and the daughter - NOT MINE) that gave a *TWO WEEKS OLD BABY* rice!!!
Surprise surprise, shes 10 now, and obese!

kekouan Wed 09-Jul-08 14:14:35

What I find worrying is that a lot of the jars that say 'suitable from 4-6 months' have dairy, gluten or meat in them! It wouldn't be quite as bad if they at least had just fruit and veg in them, but a lot of ill informed people may be giving their children gluten etc far too early.

tiktok Wed 09-Jul-08 14:18:07

constance, not quite right. The formula manufacturers won the right to extend the labelling changeover, which was designed to prevent spurious health claims.

There are no rules pending for baby food labels.

mrsruffallo Wed 09-Jul-08 14:34:54

Becuase you can wean from 4 months without harming the baby.

chloemegjess Wed 09-Jul-08 22:15:49

Because the 6 month thing is a guideline, not the law

weebump Wed 09-Jul-08 23:32:26

Some of them have changed to "stage 1" rather than just "from 4 months" which is a bit of a compromise, but better. If stage 1 is 6 months, then gluten is fine. It's a bit of a miinefield really, and no surprise that many people feed babies incorrectly by going by what it says on the pack.

ChezzaB Thu 24-Jul-08 23:33:31

I was advised by HV to start weaning my DS at 16 weeks as he was demanding feeds every hour (not just a growth spurt) I puree my own veg for him but also use HIPPS jars occasionally these are very clearly labled with stage 1 and also if they are stage 1 4months or stage 1 6months so you are feeding gluten free etc! everything is organic and they actually taste quite good!

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