To think that baby food companies should be banned from advertising food as 4months+?

[babynamelol]

I was having a discussion about weaning with a family member who works in a profession that works with families. The issue came up that there is conflicting advice between what baby food companies are telling parents and what the official guidelines say. She mentioned that many families who do no have the official information or education to research official guidelines and the benefits of waiting until 6 months use this packaging as a guideline of when to feed their babies and assume that it must be true because it is written by a big company. When she tries to advise them to wait until as close to 6 months as possible they then say, well why does it say I can feed it to my baby at 4 months then? Aibu that these notoriously money grabbing companies are simply using this to make more money, as the earlier people feed their babies then the more products they buy? Why aren't they being made to follow official guidelines?

I think that’s a fair point. Sadly as they are ‘just’ guidelines then I think any change would be hard to enforce and it would need to be voluntary from the companies

The NHS website says to consult your health visitor or GP if you want to introduce food before six months, so surely this information should be relayed on packaging that it should only be fed to baby's who are 4 months if you have checked with s health visitor or GP?

My DD had severe feeding problems (under developed throat) and I was instructed (by a doctor) to wean her at 4 months - it was to help her develop the right muscles and reflexes and after a while it meant that she was to BF easier.

YANBU would have saved me lots of dm/dmil discussions

People are entitled to wean their child when they see fit.

My children are in their 20' . Weaning advice then was to do at 12 weeks/3 months.

No where in your post do you even touch on what you think the 'dangers' of weaning at 4 months are - and these dangers, are a whole generation afflicted ?

I think they argument is that some people will always wean early, through medical need, desire or lack of understanding. So in these circumstances its better to provide the babies something safe/suitable.

My DC were born in the 1990s and NHS guidance then was to start weaning by four months - might even have been three months - so that's what we did, with no problems at all.

"People are entitled to wean their child when they see fit."

That statement is the stupidest thing I have read on MN today

Has it occurred to you that the reason advice changes all the time is that medical research is a continuing process?

Years ago mothers were advised to wrap their babies in blankets if they had a fever, put baby rice in bottles, put their babies to sleep on their tummies and send them up chimneys as soon as they could walk.

My mum waited till 4 months to wean me on the advice of the HV, and I'm 37. Maybe she was just ahead of her time?

I see your point but many families go wean earlier than 6mo for a variety of reasons and need to use hats for another variety of reasons, and I suppose they need reassurance the food they are choosing is safe for first tastes.

No it’s not. Weaning at 6m is a modern trend. I weaned mine at just under 5m. They were ready. It was fine. They slept better.

I agree with your family member.

And information about 6 month weaning was around 20 years ago.

Sorry, need to use JARS

Yabu. Ffs this world is going mad.

If someone wants to wean at 4 months or is advised to then that's their business.

Good old nanny-state UK. How very dare we allow people to think for themselves and do what's best for them.

My 16 year old was weaned at 6 months as was the guidelines at the time. It's not that new

GreenPurpleRed

So public health information is too controlling?

Government shouldn't be telling people to wash their hands or get a flu jab or stop smoking?

They should butt out and let people get on with their lives?

No one is suggesting a law.

I fail to see how this is "nanny state".

It's about manufacturer's able to market their products with less than best practice. And this in turn is actually misinforming people.

I don't think YABU OP but this is a very emotive topic on MN.

People will ignore current advice and guidelines based on up to date research because "my mum weaned me at 3 months and I'm ok" or "my child my rules". In reality most children weaned at 3-4 months will be ok but waiting til 6 months has been proven to be safer in terms of future dietary issues etc. Babies don't really need much food until they're older. Their main source of nutrition is milk (breast or formula) until they're 1.

Banning is a step too far. The information is out there. Now let people do what they feel is best.

The 6-month guideline came into effect in 2003, so 17 years ago. My teenagers were born in the late 1999s and early 2000s, so we obeyed the 4-month guideline that was advised.
"In the 1970s, studies showed that most babies in the UK started solids (usually in the form of rusks or cereal added to the bottle) between three and four weeks old. In the 1980s and early 1990s, the NHS advised weaning after three months, then in 1994, guidance changed to recommend four months as the youngest weaning age.
The current advice to wean at around six months came into effect in 2003."

I know WHO says to wean at 6 months, but this has been criticised as more relevant to developing countries. The growing number of allergies has also been blamed on later weaning.
I agree with you in principle OP if there is solid evidence for later weaning, but in reality I am struggling to find it.

If the jars said they are suitable from 4 months but clarified the current 'guidelines' then it would be better. But the simple fact is that the jars ARE suitable from 4 months!

Many children are weaned, for good reason, before 4 months. I was advised to. However, most parents are not thick and can come to their own decisions without guidelines and without a food company 'persuading' them.

*The 6-month guideline came into effect in 2003, so 17 years ago." Oops, my error - that is of course 14 years ago!

I'm in my twenties and I wasn't weaned at four months, nor was my younger brother. My Dm gave me the books she had on weaning that were from the 90s when we were born, they all say wean at 6 months, but do say some babies may be ready earlier. I don't think companies should put 'suitable from 4 months' on products at all, it encourages a certain sort of parent who is desperate for their dc to be hitting milestones early to wean before the child in question is ready, I know a lot of parents like this. Parents can chose to wean early if they want, but the proliferation of baby food jars 'suitable from 4 months' gives the impression that this is the norm, when in actuality they just want to shift more product.