To think that weaning at 16 weeks is too young?

[ThePowerOfThree]

That is the advice my friend has had from her HV yesterday. I thought it was 6 months when you started weaning. My DD is only 2 months so I haven't researched it properly yet, but 16 weeks seems quite early to me.

I weaned at 6 months as I had no reason not to follow the guidelines (and it seemed like a huge faff). I met a number of people at groups who weaned at a really early age, some were lying to the hv about it in fear of being told off. They were doing it because they had big babies, hungry babies, them watching the parents eat or they wanted them to sleep better. Only one person I knew was advised to wean early because of reflux.

The HV needs to be reported as that's against NHS official guidelines (and everyone else's)

IMO unless instructed by a paed, 16 weeks is too young and wasted time also. Weaning isn't exactly fun, I never understand the hurry

On Dr's advice (reflux) we started weaning at 4 months. DC1 was well ready for it, and eats fantastically. DC2 wasn't really bothered, so we didn't push. DC2 eventually started being interested at around 5.5 months. Not such a great eater. I think that's more to do with their personalities than anything else though.

These guidelines are a bit silly sometimes and can just cause more things to worry about. It really can vary a lot from child to child.

DS was weaned at 4 months, as was advised then, and I seem to remember he was more than ready.

IIRC they start salivating much more when they are ready for weaning. I seem to remember suddenly having to cope with gallons of extra gloopy dribbles at that time .

It was the suggested starting age when my DS was a baby 13 years ago, although I waited until he was 20 weeks. I don't think it's unreasonable on doctor or health visitor advice.

Reporting a HV who for 1 particular patient suggested not following a guideline? A guideline is just that. It's not a set of instructions from which you must never ever deviate on pain of death.
The evidence behind many medical guidelines is far more equivocal than many people realise. i suspect the more you know about science and statistics the more sceptical you are about guidelines.

How do you know what research the Scandinavian advice is based on madwomanintheattic? Maybe they're wrong? what in scandanavia land of the pure perfect and right surely not

If you look at the signs that your baby is ready for weaning- sitting up mostly unaided, Loss of tongue thrust and picking up objects and bringing them to their mouth accurately- it is very unlikely that this happens at 4 months, regardless of levels of development. 4 months vs 6 months is a huge difference in the life of a new born. In fact, I'd go as far to say that these 3 signs generally happen after 6 months- I weaned my baby at 5.5 months and it was clear when she lost her toungue thrust about 3 weeks later that now she actually could eat. Properly. No shovelling mush at her.

Yes Rebecca, she's a professional and should be giving the best advice available in line with current guidelines.

How about if she'd said "try putting her to sleep on her tummy, we all did in the 80s" or "car seat? You can use one but in the old days we didn't bother, these guidelines always changing! It'll be back to no car seats next week" why is this ok?

How do you know what research the Scandinavian advice is based on.

Maybe they're wrong? what in scandanavia land of the pure perfect and right surely not

Maybe you aren't meaning to come across as rude?

Lol, woo, I don't. That was the entire point of my post. Just that up thread someone had mentioned that the Scandinavian countries had reduced their weaning age guidelines as their research had shown that starting weaning at 6mos had led to an increase in allergies. It seemed interesting and I am idly curious. I don't remember getting out my soapbox and haranguing the audience with anything other than a mild ponder.

And that I find fashions in baby-rearing fascinating, obv. I'm way too old to blindly follow this stuff, whatever it is advocating, and whatever the research suggests. Most research has holes in it you could fall down.

Mine were all weaned at 16weeks, or thereabouts, but I don't give two stuffs at what age people choose to wean their kids. BLW hadn't been invented until dc3, and as she was born with no suck or gag reflex, and had terrible promotors issues, we decided it was a really bad idea. (Again, for her. I don't give a stuff what everyone else chooses to do). If a baby is ready, it's ready.

Evangelical posts on feeding babies are fascinating, especially the ones that are Really Very Excited about the Rules.

iPad doesn't like oromotor. Obv.

Well you said it was peer reviewed research which indicated you thought it was superior in some way?

Fun- rude to who? The whole of scandanavia? I'm sure they don't care.

I am lol that some fairly negligible data on allergies is being likened to damage after a car crash though. Hm, yes, I can see how the car seat decision is likely to get overturned any second. I mean, there's just no proof that car seats reduce injuries, is there? Lol.

(Incidentally, I do speak as someone whose dh only survived an incident because he wasn't wearing the helmet he should have been wearing at the time. But that doesn't mean helmets are inherently dangerous, lol, just that it would have killed him in that instance)

Surviving the dangers of carrot purée is probably not a huge deal.

This article discusses the 6 month advice and why it differs in some countries. It's quite interesting. I was looking for the Swedish research but am running a bit of fever so can't conentrate enough on what I'm reading to find the right one. Sorry.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8256929/Only-breastfeeding-for-six-months-may-increase-anaemia-in-babies-experts.html

That's not the point, the point is- the weaning age advice about to be overturned any second? Because it's been there for about 14 years now

guideliness always change in line with new research. I always knew the 6 month guideline would change at some point. A new recommendation will come in and will be adhered to fanatically by some and then that will be thrown out of the window too.
Some people become hysterical when anyone deviates from any guidelines. can't understand it myself.
Feed your baby solids when it seems interested.

Sorry but that telegraph article is poppycock. In itself it says nothing really, but I do recall brief controversy regarding the study which showed breastmilk wasn't enough for 6 months- it has been discredited, not mentioned or replicated since and was found to have been funded by a baby food manufacturer, if I recall correctly.

It will get changed whenever new research shows something else. It's pretty much inevitable. 14 years is nothing in research terms lol. To assume the current guidelines are absolutely forevermore rigid and that the science is eternally unequivocal is a bit daft.

Why do people get so animated about what/how/when others feed their children?

There is conflicting research and in the scheme of things it doesn't seem to make much difference. It certainly doesn't affect anyone except the child and parents involved

I am not rigidly sticking to guidelines like a brainless idiot. However, as a recent weaner Amongst others at children's groups etc I have heard constant old wives tales as reasons for "early" weaning- big baby, hungry, waking in the night, drooling, putting things in their mouths- if people took the time to look at the detail behind the guidelines they would realise none of those are reasons to wean before 6 months. People are really, really misinformed about weaning, and whilst it's not massively dangerous to get wrong it's just something that's easy to get right. That doesn't mean 6 months to the day, that means looking for the True signs, which are very unlikely to be present at 16 weeks.

The guidelines on weaning outline how to wean "safely" at 4 months, and it involves no dairy (as in yogurts), meat, wheat or eggs. So its fruit and veg puree, baby rice etc. Meat is from 6 months and eggs from 9 I believe.

So I wouldn't blanketly say 4 months is too young, but certain things it may be too young for from an allergy/intolerance prevention point of view (and stuff like kidneys though I think salt is the main factor in that)

If someone was giving the full range of foods you could argue that is too young. Also, people like to give rusks and things like that and technically that's too young for wheat, according to the guidelines anyway...

With DC1 it was six months, her choice not mine; with DC2 it was two months, a very hungry bottle-refusing baby; with DC3 I've no idea...somewhere in between I guess.

Guidelines are just that, guidelines, not hard and fast rules. Mine had very mushy baby rice (and jars and tins ) for quite a long time. Lumps were introduced very very slowly. Each and every child is different. Apart from the veggie, they will all eat anything now.

Lol, woo, I just read your poke about my 'peer reviewed' comment. It was a tongue in cheek nod to the WHO guidelines, which are also, ahem, based on peer reviewed research. Presumably. So a leetle joke. Sorry. Should have put after. Research just will not quit, dang it. I definitely wasn't heralding the new age or dragging out a pedestal, just pointing out the inconsistency in dismissing apparently new Scandinavian research in favour of older, potentially about to be superceded research. Because that sort of logic makes me laugh. Sorry.

That makes no sense. We know nothing about the scandanvian research if there is any, and neither is there any sign the 6 month guidelines research is about to be superseded.

But also, I'm referring to physical signs the baby is ready. Not research into allergies.

I'm in Denmark. There has been no change back to 4 mts for weaning. If anything new guidelines came out in March this year that more strongly recommend the 6 mts than the ones before. If anything I would say Denmark is behind the curve, as they have a habit of doing what they have done before 'as it has worked so far'. But even they are slowly moving towards the 6 mts recommendation (I have an 8mo DS).