Advanced search

OMG, talk about bullshit from a paedatrician. How are these peopel allowed to get away with such terrible misinformation???

(57 Posts)
VictorianSqualor Tue 07-Oct-08 12:33:35

A post from another site (again, sorry!)

hi all just thought i would share some info i got today. We had to go and see a piedratrition (sorry spelling terrible i know) today for my sons hernia. He is 7 weeks old and whilst I was there i thought what the hey lets ask him about weaning. Here it goes. The guidlines set are not just for this country its for the world. In othercountries women have to feed there child breast milk until 6 months as they do not have the resources to give them anything else. He also said you feed your baby when your baby needs it i.e taking loads of milk but still hungry this could happen at ANY AGE. Some women's babies can last on the milk until 6 months whilst others can only last for 3 months. He said there is no factual evidence that says it does any damage to your child in the short term or long term. He said milk is a very complicated substance to digest so they are ready for there weaning when there milk just is not enough. I thought I would share this with you because despite previous threads connecting weaning to illnesses and guts not bieng ready a piedratrition (qualified to tell me this) is saying go with what your baby needs when they need it. He said most mothers do struggle to get 6 months without weaning. Also the child will more often than not become a fussy eater as you only have a certain time scale to introduce different textures and flavours to your child. Thoses that wait until 6 months only have a few months to introduce all this where as if you introduce it earlier your child when older will be more than happy to keep trying new foods. Oh and also early weaning is not linked to obesity it was looked into but yet again no factual evidence!!!! no arguement just facts given by someone qualified to do so


phdlife Tue 07-Oct-08 12:37:45

yeah, I would've been tempted to ask him when/where he read that. hmm

nicky111 Tue 07-Oct-08 12:42:46

I think everything he said is absolutely correct. There is no evidence that early weaning does any harm -much of the advice is aimed at women in developing countries where diet is limited and nothing can be sterilised.

VictorianSqualor Tue 07-Oct-08 12:43:39

Breastmilk being hard to digest?
Guidelines being for the world but not here? (aren't we lucky we live in the UK and our babies develop quicker than everywhere else....)
No factual evidence? What about the reports that made the guidelines change in the first place?
Most mothers struggle? (possibly because they are given such bad advice)

pamelat Tue 07-Oct-08 12:53:18

My friend is a paedatrician (can't spell it either!) she weaned at 4.5 months.

Also my GP antenatal friend has told me that calpol night has only been withdrawn from use under 2 years because some parents are irresponsible and were giving it for the wrong reason, to get 3 months old to sleep though.

I suppose that they are in the know and if they do this with their own babies then I am happy to not get too worked up over it.

I waited until 5.5 months to wean but that last month was tough, she was very hungry and now I wonder whether I was cruel to withhold baby rice ... ? Who knows.

AND I have used calpol night (at 8 months) because she was in a lot of pain, and I trust my GP friend.

LittleBella Tue 07-Oct-08 13:12:08

Isn't it sad how much faith the uninformed have in professionals? You can really see why doctors start thinking they're god at some stage in their careers - they meet credulous people all day, every day, who just automatically think they have all the answers just because they've got a certificate and a white coat.


TheInvisibleManDidIt Tue 07-Oct-08 13:13:58

I started weaning both my sons (now 6 & 8) at 16 weeks, as that was what the advice was at time. It doesn't appear to have done them any harm (they were both bf)

However I didn't wean because I was struggling, nor were they starving and feeding constantly. I did it purely because I was told by hv that babies need solids from 16 weeks.

Obviously I know differently now. Wish this blw idea had been mentioned when my 2 were babies.

Bubbaluv Tue 07-Oct-08 13:14:05

It's a good question VS. What were the reports that made the guidlines change? Who wrote them and what evidence were they based? I'm not saying they aren't totally well researched and reliable, but I really have no idea!
They did change the alchol during pregnancy guidlines despite a lack of evidence to support the change, so who's to say they HAVEN'T changed the guidelines on weaning to protect those most at risk?
I'm not arguing with you btw - would be interested to know if you have info on the basis for the weaning guidelines.
Or anyone else for that matter?

theyoungvisiter Tue 07-Oct-08 13:18:25

hmm, just a thought though, do you really trust this person to relay EVERYTHING the paed said COMPLETELY accurately? He may have added "we don't have a completely accurate picture but but it's much safer to wait until 6 months" and the poster ommitted that bit...

So often it's a case of people hearing what they want to hear. I have a friend who swears blind her doctor "told" her to wean her baby at 4 months. We have the same GP and I know he is not a fan of early weaning. Obviously I wasn't at the consultation but I would be willing to bet that what he actually said was more along the lines of "I wouldn't advise weaning earlier than 4 months"

VictorianSqualor Tue 07-Oct-08 13:18:54

Mainly the COMA report in 1994.
PiLs are here so I have to go but I shall eb back.

sparkybabe Tue 07-Oct-08 13:21:41

My ds1 was weaned at 3 months -it was the advice at the time. He slept through from 14 weeks. I know now that he absolutely hates milk, and was not taking more than a few ounces of breastmilk at a time, and altho not losing weight, was not gaining either.

And he's 15 now.

VeniVidiVickiQV Tue 07-Oct-08 13:23:16

oh fgs.

Breastmilk isnt difficult to digest as such. It's just more complex. That's not the same thing. ('Difficult' could easily translate into 'indigestion' for some parents which is misleading).

I really dont get this "some mothers struggle to wait 6 months". What is the struggle? What is difficult about Not Giving Solids? It's just utterly bizarre. The only thing that might be hard on mothers is the constant pressure from peers, family and HCP's to wean. That's not struggling though.

Sariska Tue 07-Oct-08 13:25:31

There's not much joined-up thinking among certain healthcare professionals, is there? My HV broadly follows the wait-until-six-months line but a paediatrician who saw my LO when he was almost 5 months old expressed surprised that I had not started weaning him yet. He was fully breastfed, on the 25th centile for weight (but gaining weight at a good rate) and showing no signs of being dissatisfied with just milk. She recommended baby rice asap. I'm afraid my considered reaction was to ignore her and wait until he was 6 months old by which time he was actually starting to show an interest in food. I'm certainly not saying early weaning is always wrong - obviously sometimes it's not - but to say, like VS's doctor, that most mothers struggle to get to 6 months without introducing solids or, like mine, to say that an almost 5 month old should be being weaned solely due to his age strikes me as somewhat contradictory, rather unhelpful and most probably confidence-sapping when it comes to breast feeding.

Bubbaluv Tue 07-Oct-08 13:26:58

Thanks VS - will have a look!

hatrick Tue 07-Oct-08 13:27:55

Message withdrawn

pamelat Tue 07-Oct-08 13:30:04

I struggled to wait because DD was waking 3 times a night and seemed hungry (drank a whole bottle on 2 of the wakings) as soon as I introduced solids she only woke once at night, and not necessarily with hunger.She is now on the 92 percentile thingy so is clearly a big eater.

SheSellsSeashellsByTheSeashore Tue 07-Oct-08 13:33:08

breastmilk and formula are both more calorific than most first foods. I had a lovely pead dietician for dd1.

My sister was advised to wean early because her son was gaining weight to slowly. She was unsure about it so came to my appointment with dd1 and asked her. She rubbished everything my sisters hv had said. breastmilk is the best, followed by formula. before 6 months they have no need for anything else. plus they need the easy calories and nutrients through those first months.

Iklboo Tue 07-Oct-08 13:34:25

A lot of the problem is that there's no factual evidence, but research suggests that possibly etc
In 5 years time "research" might indicate we wait until 12 months - or start at 3
Darn science!

BangsHeadAgainstBrickwall Tue 07-Oct-08 13:41:19

Have namechanged for this but have 2 medical professionals in my family.

One a nurse - very big on early weaning, that breastfeeding after 6 months is purely for the mother etc.

The other is a GP, soon to retire, medically trained in the days of yore and he is very much for waiting to 6 months. His children (in the 60's and 70's!) were weaned at between 5 and 6 months as both he and his wife felt that anything earlier than that was far too early. He says that at medical school they were taught something like 12 weeks or 12 lbs (again, this is almost back in the dinosaur days) whichever comes first and that he's seen plenty of mums who have weaned far too early in his opinion, but that it is sometimes very difficult to inform people (especially when they have their minds made up that something else is actually the case).

My point? Don't know how to say this diplomatically, but I think when receiving a fair amount of professional advice, you also need to look at the person / interests of the person giving it. Some spout bollocks are perhaps slightly misinformed or out of date, others not.

HolidaysQueen Tue 07-Oct-08 14:02:24

VS - I think it's pretty harsh of you to say holding off on solids isn't a struggle, and that it isn't hard to hold off - perhaps it wasn't for you and your DCs but it can be for a lot of people. I don't mean the "oh he's 8 weeks old and isn't sleeping through any more so i'll try the baby rice" brigade. That is clearly insane. I mean women like me who had fully intended to wait until close to 26 weeks having done a lot of reading and research (and lots of your posts were helpful in that ), but found that their baby didn't seem at all content with just milk for a long long period of time.

I had no external pressures to wean early - from ILs, HVs or DH. But I weaned when it got to be a real struggle to keep up with DS's demand for food. After weeks of demand feeding my DS at a much increased frequency both day and night for several weeks from 16 weeks old (11 breastfeeds a day for several days during one horrid week), noticing that he was sitting well unaided before 5 months, and had developed a very good reach/grasp hand-mouth co-ordination, I started weaning at 22 weeks. I struggled as long as I could to get to 26 weeks but in the end, at 22 weeks after 6 pretty miserable weeks for him and me, I decided that he was trying to tell me that he was ready for food, and sure enough he took to feeding himself (finger foods or spooning it into his own mouth without me doing more than loading spoon) pretty much straight away.

The thing is, I just think the waiting until 26 weeks and then it is alright is almost as daft in some ways (albeit safer) than doing it at 17 weeks, or heaven forbid doing it earlier. You are effectively saying that 25+6 is wrong but 26+0 is right. Isn't the whole point that babies develop at different rates and we need to watch them carefully to work out when it is right for that baby rather than what the timetable says? Surely that is the advice that parents need to be given - a blanket "26 weeks and no sooner" is probably not going to register with people as much as decent advice on when might be the right time. You'll still have insane mums, but I think people like me would have benefitted from some decent advice on when was the right time rather than just being told to wait until 26 weeks regardless

Upwind Tue 07-Oct-08 14:14:01

I'd also question whether the poster is reporting her paed reliably - a friend of mine had her breastfeeding antenatal class last week and is now adamant that they were told that breastfeeding is only recommended until six months and no longer hmm

I feel sure that she did not hear or understand the word "exclusive"

VictorianSqualor Tue 07-Oct-08 15:05:59

Holidaysqueen I didn't sat it wasn't a struggle.
I commented on 'most mothers struggle'
I don't think they do.

happycamper10180 Tue 07-Oct-08 16:06:04

It's worth noting the original comment was posted on a 0-3 month forum so it's someone advocating this for much younger babies. IMPO it is as likely the poster was completely talking out their arse as the paediatrician saying it. Either is possible.

Close to 6 months is one thing, what I find appalling is people stuffing rusk into 6 week olds and then advocating it to others as a good idea.

Peachy Tue 07-Oct-08 16:08:58

Yes but if you see a 'piedratrition'(Q) you will be sold Pies, surely? wink

My paediatrician OTOH, who is qualified to treat children medically, advises 6 months unless in extreme circumstances (which we were, but these are rare)

lulumama Tue 07-Oct-08 16:10:24

there is a raft of difference between your 21 week old sitting up, able to pick up food, chew and swallow, and an 8 week old being fed rusk or rice in a bottle or via spoon.

there is earlier weaning, adn then there is irresponsible and unecessary IMO

got NHS weaning / unicef leaflets yesterday. they are clearly saying solids around 6 months and that milk is sufficient before then and that night waking is not a reason to wean early.

Join the discussion

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

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: