to think too many HV are pussyfooting around the "no solids before 6mos" guidelines

[BouncingTurtle]

because so many mums I know are still weaning their babies way before this?
The research backing up why we should wait until 6months has been around a while, the guidelines have been in place for several years, early weaning has only been around since the early part of the last century, co-incidentally about the same time that commercial baby foods and formula became readily available to the masses.

Is it the guilt thing? My mum weaned me at 6mo and I have IBS and other gastro-intestinal complaints which have been linked to early weaning. My mum doesn't feel guilty about weaning me early - and why should she? She was only doing what she was advised to do at the time and there wasn't the research available then that we have today!

Yet HVs are still failing to support mums in waiting til 6months and still hauling out the same old chestnuts about 4mo growth spurt being taken as readiness for solids and ignoring the fact that BM & FM are more nutritionally complete and calorific than baby rice and pureed carrot? They don't seem to tell mums why they should wait.

My HV told me to start weaning my LO at 5 months due to her reflux. She hasnt been sick since she even keeps her milk down now. I hope to god that I havent done the wrong thing but she has just got up to the 25th centile now after so long on the 2nd that I think I did do the right thing....

"I still say that weaning should be weight related, as just as bigger adults burn more calories through daily activities, so do bigger babies. Pure physics. There is such a thing as demand outstripping supply."

Hmmmm - have you seen this?

bloody nora!

My belief is that most women will have enough to keep even a really big baby going on breastmilk alone for at least the first six months.

But it is hard if you have a toddler too. I know because there's only 22 months between my second and third. I managed by bf on the go. And at least if you're bf you still have an arm free to cuddle a toddler!

ds was over 12lbs when he was born and I exclusively bf him for 5 months. He remained way at the top of the growth chart.

I only decided to wean him after he'd already stolen some of my banana to chew and swallow, and I knew by day 3 of his increased need to feed but still being miserable that it wasn't just a growth spurt.

I actually felt guilty at the 5 month thing for a looong time until I found out about blw!

I weaned both dc at around 5 and a half months because it felt instinctively to me like that was the right time. Weaning at 4 months was the guidelines when DS was that age but it didn't feel right so I didn't, even though I was advised to.

Quite frankly my HV with ds was useless. She quite ruined the first 6 months of our time together with threats to refer us to a paediatrician because he wasn't gaining weight quickly enough. I remember walking home from the clinic at least 5 times crying with worry (you know how it is with PFB). A year or so later loads of newspaper articles about how the wrong charts were being used for BF and FF babies. All that worry and fear for nothing during a time I will never get back again.

My daughter only fed once a day, no, that's not true she only fed once in three days! I still didn't start her on solids because her body wasn't ready for them.

fabsmum, I know of a group of mums who are trying to set up a new aid organisation after reading that! Part of me would love to be part of that!

Amethyst86 my HV sounded like she was going to refer me to social services! So I called the Neonatal MW who I had been seeing until a few weeks before and she got me straight in with my paediatrician. He said "She's fine but what do we do to get the HV off your back because that's no good for you?" I love that man! I'm hoping this baby will be under him too (good chance of it).

SummatAnNowt I'm convinced there is a manual in the womb that babies amuse themselves with for 9 months, because I hear of so many babies who do BLW by their own choice!

My HV said weaning shouldnt be until 6 months but if you think it necessary you can do so from 4 months - your wish ( her words). I wasn't given a reason, and even now the info i have has been gained from the internet. I have asthma, so i hope my baby will wait until 6 months. she is 18 weeks now and more than content with her milk and sleeping well at night.

I was a teenage mum with my first baby and i had this notion that weaning early would somehow help her development progress which i know now is rubbish. I wonder how many other young mothers feel that weaning is somehow giving their baby a hand to grow up ? Or does that sound like i'm off my rocker i know what i mean.
It's that competitive edge that some mums have about their babies.

Tori, you were an hcp, weren't you? So you know that it's not just pure physics, and is pretty complex biology. It's fair enough to have an opinion, but I think if you're going to bring science into the debate, then it would be very helpful to bring proper science - controlled studies, etc - into the debate, and not just say things like "pure physics". My anecdotal experience of a 10lb 11oz newborn who remained on the 99.6th centile while exclusively breastfed is no more conclusive evidence than anyone elses, but it's food for thought, surely?

Habbibu, I don't recall my dd2s weight being given as a reason for weaning. She was gaining weight fine on milk, however, I did not have enough time in my day to feed her 15 times and an extra 2-3 night feeds and was completely exhausted. This left me lethargic and unable to cope well with a jealous dd1. She took full advantage and played up at every feed because she new if I was going to discipline her for bad behaviour that I would have to put the baby down Time was the problem. I had enough supply but dd2 refused to feed for long enough at one go and it was shredding my relationship with dd1. If I hadn't weaned early I would have stopped breast feeding and given bottles of ff so I knew she was getting enough milk in less feeds iyswim. Unfortunately my dd2 refuses all bottles and I could not physically or mentally carry on feeding that often in that situation.

Tori, I have real sympathy for the difficulties you've had - I remember your feeding threads with dd2, and how tough things were with dd1, so I really didn't intend my post to sound like a criticism of your own decisions - apologies if that's how it sounded. It's just that the "big babies" theory is wheeled out a lot by HVs - happened to me with dd, who was doing just fine, and I had lots of time to devote to her, so wasn't facing the same pressures you were. Yet I was encouraged to wean, despite the fact she was glued to the 99.6th centile. I understand the logic of what you said earlier about baby weight/calorie intake but I am unconvinced that it's borne out in practice.

In relation to calories needed, the more active and the larger the baby the more calories are likely to be needed (in babies of comparative age). There are variables such as amount of sleep, core body temp and metabolism which will also affect calorific needs.
My dd2 was able to walk in a baby walker at 4mths and stood playing in a leapfrog playstation from 15wks and is therefore very active as well as large. It is well known that excercise creates more appetite, this will lead to more need to feed and so on...... It is physics, granted there are lots of variables, but it is all related to the energy conversion equations which involve mass of an object, distance moved, etc.

I know the physics, Tori, but what I'm asking is to see actual research in human biology/medicine which proves your point - not so much that some babies need more calories than others, but that earlier weaning is of benefit to larger babies. I've never seen any research to back that up.

The research is lacking and needs to be done. Just as 20 yrs ago somebody thought 'I know, I will do research into babies intestinal development to see if weaning early is harmful'. If you had asked mothers then they would have said there can't be a problem, there is no research to back it up. Do you get my point? Logic is the most important reason for doing something, not just because somebody has done some research on a sample group of most likely less than 1% of the worlds population. If somebody said that chocolate could cause cancer in 1:100000000000000000000000000000000000 of the worlds population would you stop eating it? My point here is that in another 20 yrs research may well be done which proves that babies need to be weaned after 4mths but according to their weight considerations.

My HV was telling me 6months and I thought it was a load of crap. What she was telling me contradicted what she was also telling me about milk and ignoring the needs of our baby.

DD - PFB - was born at 5lb, was BF and by 4.5 months was 'technically' underweight, allegedly (turns out probably not, was not a BF chart), and the HV mentioned possible failing to thrive.

DD would not take a bottle for top-ups. No advice other than keep trying, she will scream but she wont starve herself. HV stated it was probably a problem with my milk.

We asked if we should wean her early. OH NO, cant do that, guidelines say 6 months! So, we cant give her a bottle, we cant feed her enough of my milk, and we cant wean her. So she will starve .

So, we ignored her, went to GP who said nothing wrong with her weight, she is a small child, will always be small, however if we were concerned, wean her now.

We waited until 5months, but had become so stressed about the HV stating that it was my milk, that we said, to hell with her advice about weaning, she needs the food.

And it turns out, nothing at all wrong with my milk. When weaned, she ate a ton, and still stayed small, on the same plot as always on the chart.

I think what I am saying is that 1. 6 months is not always right. 2. HV should not just spout governmental guidelines without the knowledge to back it up. I felt so lacking in confidence in anything she said, we totally disregarded it.

Only went back for her 8 month checkup.

I would be interested to know what food (other than egg yolk IIRC) is as calorie dense as milk.