weaning at 3 months

[queenmools]

This thread is unashamedly judgey and I am aware that there is another weaning thread ongoing atm but I am so aghast at what I heard today that I feel the need to discuss it with you all.
I was at a childminding training course today, during break time a lady started showing pictures of her "clever" 12 week old son eating his beef stew last night! A lady on the other side of the room then piped up with "have you already started weaning?" I was expecting her to say how that was not a good idea but no she then said " I'm glad I'm not the only one" she went onto explain that her baby ( same sge) was just so hungry and therefore was ready for solids.
iabu to be so shocked that seemly intelligent women, who are training to be child minders, have so little regard for current guidelines?

Ds1 was 9lb 5oz, he was and still is big, (as in tall not fat) He's the tallest in his class by about an inch and is the same height as his older sister. He was weaned at 6 months and not consistently eating regular meals till he was 10 months. Weight has nothing to do with readiness to wean

I agree that weight is a red herring. DS was 9lbs 13oz at birth, never lost any weight only gained. He always has been at the top end of the height and weight charts. We weaned at one week off 6 months, as per guidelines, because he could sit unaided, bring food to his mouth and wasn't thrusting food back out.

permet you do have to go to a gp unless you're paying private, in order to get a referral to a pead or other expert. Admittedly I didn't bother pushing for one as I very much trusted my gp and their knowledge/ experience. But if that hadn't been the case, in the absence of a hv who will support you, a gp would generally still be the first port of call.
Fwiw there isn't anything wrong with dds digestion either. She just had a larger appetite than is considered normal for even a hungry baby. She was feeding to the point she was so full of milk it came back up but she was still hungry. In photos from that time she had the stomach distension of a famine victim. But not due to air/ wind.
I do agree though wind can have the same effect, and people often confuse the two. But that fact, along with other physical signs of readiness isn't in the public eye as much as 'wait to 6 months' 'ask your hv'. And until that changes, people will feel they need to wean when perhaps they don't.

Lurked, having looked after a few babies with digestive complaints, I have had to go to the GP but only for a referral to a paed because GPs are not experts at all. I wouldn't be happy at all with somebody just dismissing a distended abdomen, screaming, not sleeping as 'hunger' without any kind of expert opinion, investigation or careful consideration of options. That's just me though. I've never seen any scientific evidence to support this theory of a baby being too hungry to survive on milk alone. The babies I've looked after with the symptoms you describe (comfort feeding, bringing up milk, tender abdomen, screaming, never happy with the amount of milk etc) all had particular needs needing to be addressed. Most often it was silent reflux and treating that dealt with the problem. I never would have accepted "they're just hungry" and particularly not from a general practitioner.

It worked for us permet which is the only relevant part. I'm sure if I shared my own diet, I'd be wrongly assumed to be obese. And if I shared my actual weight I'd be told I must have something wrong with my digestion at the least. However there is nothing wrong with me. It's not wise to diagnose from posts on a forum.

Aargh, why must people persist in claiming that hunger has anything to do with when to start weaning??!

To reiterate what others have pointed out, breast milk is far more calorific and easily digestible than purees - if a baby is hungry, milk is better than baby food.

I am not diagnosing Lurked. I'm trying to give good, unbiased information based on what we scientifically known about babies, guts, weaning and best practice.

It is very important that on a public forum, accurate and up to date information is given and that it corresponds to what we know and what is recommended.

Your story is your own and I'm glad that you feel your decisions were the right ones. However, we must be careful not to offer opinion as fact. "I did x and we were fine" is not the same as "evidence suggests that x is best practice". Otherwise my wholeheartedly recommending my decision to walk out in traffic this morning without looking could be judged on outcome as opposed to what we actually know about human beings and traffic.

Which permets is why I've repeatedly said weaning early isn't always the best idea, and said that I did so with my gps blessing, I've hardly promoted the idea that 12 weeks is the optimum weaning age in any post. But I'm not going to state that 6 months is always the best time either, as that's equally irresponsible on a forum many people read. All that does is worry people who for whatever reason have babies that don't follow that average, whether before or after, and in my opinion promote the idea seeking advice from outsiders is pointless. Which will encourage people to blindly follow advice from family and friends which may, or may not be correct. Far more accurate to say that as with any other aspect of development, average age to be ready for weaning varies, and as with any average, some are early, some are late. And if in doubt, or especially early or late, speak to as many hcps as necessary until you are given advice or support that works for your baby. I will however feel free to offer medical opinion on my child as fact about my child, regardless of whether you think you know better, about someone you know very little about. And continue to suggest that people consult experts before following any advice that varies from guidelines. Because giving advice that implies everyone can and should wait till 6months is counter productive, for everyone whose baby didn't get a copy of the average age manual. If anyone with a baby they're considering weaning early is reading this, whose advice are they more likely to take? Mine to speak with a hcp, or do you think reading posts speaking in absolutes and in condemnation are going to sway them against all the family advice telling them it's ok to wean? I'd suggest the former is likely to be more helpful.
My dd has yet to reach any developmental milestone dead on average age, some are early, some are late. And that's really not unusual. So I won't go round suggesting weaning is the exception to every other aspect of development.

When my eldest was a baby ( he's 20 now) weaning was started at 3m and you know what, they all lived to tell teh tale. When my DB was a baby weaning started at 3 WEEKS!! By the time I was born in 1969 it had dropped back to 6 weeks.
Guidance changes all the time.i wouldn't be surprised if things come full circle and the vast majority of babies thrive.

Lurked you are right- as with all other developmental and growth aspects of a child there is variation.

There are profound changes that happen to the gut wall deep inside a baby's digestive tract.
Babies are born with fairly "leaky" guts, like a net carrot bag, large molecules are able to pass with ease directly into the blood stream. This can be of benefit to the infant but usually it is a bad thing. Foreign proteins and large amino acids escaping into the blood stream can set up a cascade of biochemical events which are thought to sometimes permanently damage the developing immune system.

As a baby grows these "holes" in the gut wall start to shrink and somewhere between the ages of 4-6 months solid food becomes much safer for a baby to eat.
Indeed some babies may achieve this at 4 months, but we don't know which ones, it is impossible to determine that by behaviour, or hungriness, or sleep patterns or Mum knows best.. We would need an intrusive test to microscopically examine the gut wall of each baby to see if these changes had happened.

We do know that by six months pretty much all babies will have guts closed enough to make foreign proteins safe.

So the blanket advice to wait until 6 months is there to protect all infants.
A healthy infant will not suffer having to exist on milk alone until six months- indeed even after the introduction of solids milk remains the baby's most important source of nutrients until a year or so.

So while I agree with your premise about developmental variation, it is a safety issue to delay weaning.

goblin I agree with everything you've said. I just think in general we should be promoting the idea that there are other aspects to weaning, and that its ok to discuss your concerns/ opinion about your baby with hcps. Weaning before 6 months is almost becoming a forbidden taboo, something that should never even be brought up in conversation as a possibility. And If you create a situation where people won't even bring it up for fear of incrimination and judging, chances are they'll get the false impression it's also not ok to mention to an actual professional in real life. Which of course won't stop anyone weaning when perhaps the baby isn't ready, it will just stop them openly seeking opinions.

I'm sure plenty of posters would actually respond saying to get medical advice if a new mum actually posted about weaning at 12 weeks, or even 4 months, and offer constructive opinions on other possible causes for whatever was bothering the baby. But from reading threads like this, I can't imagine any new mum lacking confidence posting about the possibility of weaning early to get the constructive advice, for fear of being jumped on by the majority.

Lurked, you have completely misread me. I haven't been prescriptive at any point (I actually argued that the guidelines aren't prescriptive if you read what I said, I talked about following a baby's lead, about looking for true signs of readiness), I didn't say a thing about your own baby and what might have been the case for them. I didn't imply I knew better.

On many things we are agreed (there is an average age, there are true signs of readiness and if your baby is behaving in a way that concerns you, ask an expert via a GP referral or use a decent hv if you have one who can help with an appropriate course of action).

What you did was contradict all of the above good advice. You said that your baby waking up at night, breastfeeding a lot, being large, being mobile etc all meant/might mean a baby needs weaning earlier. You said that some babies need weaning because they are hungry. None of that is true in the slightest. I at no point said anybody MUST do anything but advised of actual fact and evidence. You made some sweeping statements which support erroneous early weaning.

I'm sorry you've misunderstood me. Nobody is jumping on anybody, there is no majority on this thread (as many people are defending early weaning as advising against it).

It is important to be led by an individual baby's development but to do this, you have to know what that development actually indicates and when weaning might be appropriate.

lurked- I do understand your point.

I too have seen the pressures surrounding weaning, including those from HCPs.

My babies were late to food, around 8 or 9 months, and I actually found myself lying to my HCP, family members and friends as I was being pushed from 4 months onwards ( 18 years ago).
Thankfully I did my own research, had fantastic support from some experts elsewhere ( although most still within the NHS) and followed my babies lead.
So I do understand the pressure- but this isn't about a parenting style- pram/sling, SAHM/working this is about health issues.

lurked, can I apologise too if you feel criticised or attacked? I really, really don't mean to come across this way. I think, as I said above, that when your baby isn't one of the ones to whom the guidelines refer, your experience whilst valid, useful and interesting, doesn't pertain to the discussion about the trend for early weaning in healthy babies. It adds useful information in general but can't be used to make generalisations across the population iyswim.

The guidelines are 'these are the signs, they will happen around 26 weeks, follow your baby's lead. Don't wean before 17 weeks and if in doubt, follow the advice of a HCP'.

Babies with clinical need for early weaning (hunger is not clinical need, it is subjective) are considered along a different paradigm.

In that case permets I apologise, however you've misread me if you think my decision was based on night waking, being hungry, or being mobile. It wasn't. And maybe some gps don't know enough. Mine did, in more cases than mine or weaning. Perhaps in compensation for the lunatic local hv. And I perhaps phrased it badly if you thought I was accusing you of jumping on people. I meant that with the way it's often discussed, and condemned, it will put people off asking for fear of being jumped on. And not based solely on this thread, just a general attitude. Not that you personally will be doing it

goblin Friends ds was closer to one, and at 2 was still getting most nutrition/ calories from breastfeeding. She was of a fuck you confident nature and brought a few others out of the woodwork who like you felt pressured by loudly telling insistent people if they weren't her pead they could stick their opinions.
Yes more important than sahm/ sling etc. Hence why I think it's more important people feel they can discuss it without fear of ridicule. I can't think of any reason to give a 6 month old rusks let alone a 12wk one, but if someones doing it because it's what they ate and their mum and gran said it was fine, I'd rather they at least learnt healthier options and alternatives than carried on feeding rusks on the quiet.