to think that someone who works in paediatrics should know better than to wean at 20 weeks?

[vampirebankholidayweekend]

none of business what age they wean, I know.

It is a member of my family, she has decided to start weaning her son, who is 2 weeks younger than my DD, which would make him 19 weeks this week. She has said he is particularly hungry and her health visitor has managed to pursuade her to hold off til 20 weeks!
Even my mother, who weaned us at about 3 months (as was the advise in those days) has tried to convince her it;s probably a growth spurt.
She is a paediatric nurse

IneedAbetterNickname - that's not correct about the WHO. They are very clear about their guidelines and the risks involved. They do not massage age guidelines because they expect people to subtract from them!

By all means ignore the guideline and risks, but ridiculous to suggest that the WHO are misleading us!

I can back shineon here. My son (coming up 13) was weaned at 13 weeks. Actually, the recommendation had just changed to 16 weeks but you could still be given out of date pamphlets which had 13 weeks as the time frame in them, and you could still buy baby food that said from 13 weeks on it, so the change had only just been made.

I held at until 16 weeks for my other 3 children, but by hell it was a struggle. I don't know how women hold it together these days, hanging out until 26 weeks. I take my hat off to you actually.

vlc - she didn't suggest they were misleading us. She said her midwife friend had come to that conclusion when weaning her own children.

MIL was horrified that I wasnt weaning DS2 at 12 weeks as thats when all her babies were weaned. She even went so far as to tell me I was a cruel mother, and that SS would take the children off me as their needs weren't being met and SIL was pg with her 1st at the time, and was adamant that she would wean at 12-16 weeks (and she's a nanny so she knows everything about babies, according to her and MIL anyway) Then when her DS was born,she said she would wail until 26 weeks, as that's the guidelines.I started weaning DS2 at 24 weeks, so then was a 'bad mum' as I weaned him too early again! Then SIL weaned DN at 16 weeks, and again I was a bad Mum for 'starving' my DS (yes they did actually tell me that)!!!!!

What Lulu says

however I know a SALT who has a child at 5 months who has been eating a while yet was born 8 weeks early. Nowt I can do abut it, bar the initial double take.

Oh dear...the usual mix of 'I heard that....' and 'my friend told me....' and 'it's fashion...'

These are the facts. The WHO (and since 2003 - 6 years) changed its guidance about the optimum time for exclusive breastfeeding from 4-6 mths to 6 mths about 10 years ago.

The UK guidance before 2003 had been the same for about 20 years.

The guidance changed because of a major, years-long, systematic review of the evidence, involving data from many papers from populations in different parts of the world. It had nothing to do with people weaning at 8 weeks needing to be told to do it later, so 6 mths would be interpreted as 4 mths. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

In fact it had nothing to do with public education or health promotion at all - it was looking at the evidence.

There is, in this evidence, very little to say that solids at 20 weeks is harmful (though there is evidence that it is harmful before 17 weeks) but there is no evidence, in general, that it is beneficial...as a public health policy. For individual babies, individual advice should be given.

On the whole, healthy babies should probably decide for themselves when they're ready and the evidence is that this is about six months, with most babies somewhere a bit before or a bit after.

DS1 was weaned at 13 weeks on out of date HV advice also, it was certainly the way; ds2 / ds3 at 16 weeks, ds4 we held out as long as possible until paed insisted on it at 5 months, but the strange thing s that we werent seeing things as obvious hunger signs (the insistende was milk allergy related) but finding other easons such as growth spurt; I do expect some kids need early weaning but I also think a lot of the perceived need is misread signs of other things, if that makes sense?

Thinking about it, virtually every single child attending school right now was likely to have been weaned at 16 weeks or potentially earlier. In what way is the entire school population at risk?

But we do know allergies are saoring DG don't we? (at elast i think we do, no evidence). I know ds1 has plenty intolerances anyhow.

I'm liking the whole when your baby is ready, can sit tongue thrust thing, THAt makes sense to me and allows for individuality in babaies. We have a range of ages for walking and everything else, so let the babies development dictate.

I don't know that the proliferation of allergies has been planted firmly at the door of early weaning though, has it? Put it this way: I have 4 children, all of them weaned earlier than the current recommendation. They are all very healthy and regularly get 100% attendance certificates at the end of the school year. One of them has very mild asthma. He is the one who was breastfed the least (6 months) which might be significant, I don't know, but I don't attribute this one allergy amongst the four of them to early weaning. My dh has asthma and I always assumed at least one of my children would inherit it from him.

Peachy - but surely OUR generation would be the ones with the allergies as we were the ones weaned very early.

Maybe allergies are due more to the excessive use of pesticides, the fact that our fruit and veg contains no dirt anymore, the excessive use of anti-bacterial this that and the other we squirt in our homes. I have no idea, just an opinion. It can't be doing us any good surely ...

No DG but it's a possibility isn't it? or more likely early weaning might be one factor that could trigger a food issue. three of my four have food intol issues, so I imagine they are genetically linked, but even then a trigger is often needed.

If i'm asked for advice on this I always quote WHO guidelines. My personal belief is that 4-6 months when baby is showing signs of readiness (ds4 asn't sitting at 5 months which is why we were resisting) is fine. I also think that the majority of chidlren will be unaffected by early weaning, but we can't ID those who might be in advance IYSWIM? Risk avoidance.

Good post wishingchair.

Strange isn't it, that the OP takes the line here is a health professional who should know better doing this dreadful thing. Why doesn't she look it another way: here is a health professional who knows a lot about this, doing things differently - hmm, I wonder if she knows something I don't?

I don't pretend to know Peachy and your approach seems to me to be a reasonable one. I just can't help loling or taking offence when people suggest we mothers of slightly older children probably did our children irreparable harm by weaning when we did. Cheers for that!

Wishingchair has a good point: if early weaning caused allergies, surely we, the children of the 60s and 70s would be worst hit? There must at least be other factors involved.

(BTW, none of my children could sit up when they were first weaned. That was what the bouncy chair was for! )

wc well I do have several LOL

as do many people I know.

You'd need a whole chart showing allergy increases ovcer a wide number of years wouldn't you to be sure? But there may also be some mileage in needing to know what people eat- for examle one of the most allergenic foods is Kiwi; relatively new import.

It'spossibly also a multim dimensional thing. So when we were unborn our Mums ate nuts etc and we were born with the defences in palce so were OK but if our Mums avoid eating nuts (as the guidline was untilrecently) then early weaning predisposes us to this allergy. or something.

ASD is another disorder some link to this, it may be the case that children born with the gene have it triggrerd by guetn and casein in their diet.Holding off on those may change the development for a few individuals. Certainly ds4, as a sibling to 2 with ASD and one with other spectrum related disorders won't have any until he is 3.

I wonder- what is the value in early weaning? Is thre some intrinsic thing about it that is such a benefit that we should be trying to justify it? I can't think of any so for me can't see the point.

Of my Mums 3 children I was weaned latest and breastfed longest, yet I am the only one with eczema, when I 'should' be less likely to have it than my brothers

Oh I agree about the guilt thing- a few things we did for ds1 in good faith (eg soya mlk and rotten teeth- hypoallergenic formula would have been better) have been shown to have been maybe not the best option but what can you do without a tardis?

The main advantage I can see to early weaning is that the mother gets some sleep at night. Ok ok I know, nothing to do with the child, (though it might help the child if s/he can sleep through the night and get the benefits sleep brings) but it seemed pretty damned important to me as the sleep deprived mother!

can I suggest that all those baby books and magazines and internet articles that some of you seem to have stacked up to the ceiling should all be thrown in the bin (recycling bin of course)
and follow your instincts and take the lead from your baby

I am glad my children are older, the advice seems just so confusing now

I started DS recently at 20 weeks after advice from HV and Paed. He does have severe reflux and has his meds in apple purree. He has been fine.

Recommendations are just that - recommendations. If everyone listened to their child and had the confidene to think it through themselves, instead of worrying what the health visitors/feeding police/other mums thought we would all be a good deal happier. I weaned both mt my childnen onto solids at 18 weeks and off the breast at 10 months (ish) and both have good appetites and a good general health :0