weaning - what are your views????

[mummy2t]

Hi all, my little one is 15 weeks and i am not going to start weaning until 6 months. after talking to alot of different mums i have have found not many of them share my view! some are definately going to wean at 4 months, some i have met have considered weaning BEFORE 4 months and i was told on one woman who has been giving baby rice at bed times to try and get baby to sleep through!!!????!!!! bubba is only 3 months old!!!! i am quite shocked that there are so many people that just ignore advice thats out there, thinking they know better. What does everyone think about this??

It isn't to do with weaning, it's to do with understanding, technology etc changing so that we learn and know how to do things better and safer.

We used to think it was OK to not strap children in and now we have strict laws on what seat they should wear at what stage. It's possible (very possible as there's a petition happening to the PM) that the laws will change again. That doesn't mean that we are wrong right now to strap our children in this way but it will be wrong to do it if we know better and are told we need to do it that way.

Have I covered everything seeker?

the carseat analogy is to counter 'but 10yrs ago I did it this way and all my kids are fine' type post.

Ok I think I get it. - Hope I didn't come across rude. Just didn't get it! lol

Ha, MrsB, you said everything I did in one sentence!

Lucky a lot of things change, like the recipe for formula (as it's been discussed already in this thread) doesn't say anymore (to paraphrase and I'm sure cmot can put the right words in) "go down to the local building site and get some brick dust" But in general we move with the times, with new understanding and accept that whilst we were doing our best with the knowledge we had, we now have knowledge that there is a better way to do things.

Still nobody has linked to the research.

Anyone?

Naetha (and any others looking for research) - it's easy to find the research. The quickest way to find it is to go to the WHO or American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines, because they explicitly name (and often link to) the research papers they base their decisions on.

Alternatively, this page from kellymom is a good starting point.

An even better way is to use a search engine like PubMed - but it tends to throw up thousands of papers so it can be a real job to find exactly what you want.

You have to dig a bit because it's a complex issue which can't be covered in just one paper. There are some landmark papers which I'll come back and link to as soon as I have time (might be a couple of days though).

Oh, also wanted to say that cmotdibbler's observation (that before 1940 many people only weaned after 9 months) effectively scotches any notions about a biological instinct to wean at 4 months.

If there truly was an instinct to wean at 4 months people would've been doing it for millennia, not 1 lifetime.

From the American Academy of Pediatrics Website

"Most babies are ready to eat solid foods at 4 to 6 months of age. Before this age, most babies do not have enough control over their tongues and mouth muscles. Instead of swallowing the food, they push their tongues against the spoon or the food. This tongue-pushing reflex helps babies when they are nursing or drinking from a bottle. Most babies lose this reflex at about 4 months of age. Energy needs of babies increase around this age as well, making this an ideal time to introduce solids."

Also from promoting healthy nutrition published by aap

page 130 also states 4 months to 6 months.

and recent research actually shows leaving weaning after 6 months actually increases allergies because the immune system is not stimulated enough.

christy - where have you read this? It's something I've believed for a while (there seemed to be an increase in nut allergies once they told us not to eat nuts while pregnant)

LOL at AAP's right hand not knowing what its left hand is doing.

Here is the official AAP policy.

"Complementary foods rich in iron should be introduced gradually beginning around 6 months of age." from point 10.

Actually, it's a bit of a worry if the guidance for parents doesn't reflect the official policy statement.

Christy, if the research you're referring to is that Finnish one about weaning at 9 months, then we've already discussed why I think it's a bit rubbish.

As far as I can see (and the AAP expert committee agrees with me ) there's pretty strong evidence that weaning before 4 months increases the risk of allergy.

Anything after that is basically anyone's guess. There's no good evidence for an ideal time to wean from the allergy point of view. In fact it looks increasingly as if weaning age is not a significant factor in allergy.

And that's why allergies have risen recently since weaning age was low? Why allergies didn't happen so much in the past as it does now? Don't forget there's not that many people who wait till after six months.

I know people who come from countries (again, not developing countries) who believe in weaning at a year old and one even later. They've done it for millenia, they wouldn't still be doing it if they were suffering from allergies they probably wouldn't have survived!

Maybe the rise of allergies has more to do with the rise of popularity of formula.

I would be interested in seeing the studies into this theory.

Tink, I've read around allergy quite a bit (allergic family) and it looks as if the rise in allergies is probably not down to one factor, or even a handful of factors, but instead to an array of factors with complicated relationships.

It makes sense that the rise in allergies ultimately comes down to lifestyle factors in some way (because people's genes don't change that quickly) - but no-one seems to be able to find examples that work for all countries/situations.

I agree, I was trying to make other suggestions to show that it just doesn't make sense to say it's because of late weaning. The thing that puzzles me is that not many people actually wait till six months, let alone beyond

I intended to wait till 6 mths but my son was hungry 9lb at birth, advised by the doctor to wean early etc so weaned him at 4mths with no effects that I know of!

weaning is such a hassle that I wouldn't recommend it before 6 months (or even later) to anyone. I started at 23 weeks (due to boredom and social pressure) and I get less free time because of that... worst of all, she doesn't take much yet (3 weeks later). she can take the food, but she's more interested in playing with the spoon and drinking bm from her cup. also, it gives her a lot of wind and poo is smellier than before.

for the next one, I will go the BLW way.

I had to see a consultant paediatrician this morning because of my ds2's weird feeding habits, and apparent reflux. Without being prompted, he said, "your son is a perfect candidate for starting solids sooner rather than later" [he is 17 weeks by the way]. I then asked him whether weaning at this stage might bring problems later in life with gut, digestion etc and he said that after 4 months babies are absolutely fine to try a few solids, especially if they can support their heads well; in fact, according to him, many babies benefit from weaning before 6 months.
It's generally down to the individual baby. If he, a consultant paediatrician and a specialist in babies and feeding, didn't see the problem in giving my ds2 solids before 6
months, then why do so many of you?
I'm not advocating a general rule of early weaning AT ALL. I'm only saying, some babies, it seems, might do well starting solids a little earlier than the 6 months. As long as it's sensible, fairly bland stuff in fairly small amounts. Surely not that controversial??

Are you sure he's upto date with the latest understanding? Are you sure he believes it?

So many times I've heard of HCPs saying "yes, but I've been doing this job x years and we've always done it this way" or "those guidelines are for the developing countries" I don't take everything they say as being totally acurate, whoever they are.