should i change to aptamil 3 or not??

[weston]

just noticed aptamil 3 to be used from 6 months plus, DD2 is nearly 9 months and have been using aptamil 1, worth changing or not?

No, it's a load of old cobblers.

If your dc has a good varied diet then there's no need. If you are concerned about the diet then it does include more iron in thier diet. However...it is a curd based milk as apposed to whey so you may find that they fill up on the milk and don't go for solids so much.

No, not if she has a good range of solids.

Have a look at these leaflets produced by UNICEF. They explain about different types of formula.

Follow on formula was invented solely as a product to be advertised in this country.

The UK adopted the WHO regulations to ban formula advertising, however they have failed to implement a ban on follow-on formula - the get around is that it is advertised as being "from 6 months".

In the USA, for example, there is not such product.

I would as follow on formula often cheaper. No other reason!

Just because the all poewerful usa doesn't have it doesn't mean its not useful in some circumstances.

I avoided the 1 year + formula hype first time around and just used normal milk but wasn't sure with DD2 as its clever marketing to say its to supplement wearning from 6 months +, nothing like making life confusing...

But it exists only for marketing purposes.

The added iron often makes babies constipated. Best avoided.

yr 1 + is not often needed but in some cases the follow on is useful. To blanket criticise it is ignorant and unsympathetic.

I'm off to bed now but happy to justify comments tomorrow

Sorry for hijacking on a slightly different topic. Going back to work next week and DD will be on formula during the feeds while I'm at work, DD prefers SMA but I feel compelled to give her Aptamil (being conned probably into believing it's better as it's more expensive) - is there a difference nutritionally?

Looking forward to seeing why follow on is ever more useful than sticking to regular formula....'cos I can't think of any reason at all!

Unless the ff baby suddenly goes off formula, and will only drink the follow on (though I have never heard of this).

Follow on is not in use in the USA because they are permitted to advertise regular formula there. So there is no marketing need for it.

rainbowweaver - start a new thread, yes? Your question deserves proper attention and discussion, and things will get confused here if answers are posted.

coca - re your comment "Just because the all poewerful usa doesn't have it doesn't mean its not useful in some circumstances."

What I meant was that because formula advertising is permitted in the USA they don't bother to make this with product - because they can advertise formula.

OP asks is it worth changing from aptamil 1 to aptamil 3. Everyone is entitled to their own view.

I think it is important that people know:

"Follow?on milks are described as suitable for babies from six months of age. It is not necessary to move your baby on to these milks. Follow?on milks should never be used for babies under six months old as they are not nutritionally suitable. owever, the labels can look very similar to first milks so read them carefully."

(Taken from leaflet I linked to above).

FF manufacturers have been asked to make it VERY clear which are follow on and which are not so as to avoid parents of babies under 6m buying the wrong product.

They WILL NOT make them sufficiently different unless they are FORCED BY LAW to as otherwise it undermines the who reason for the prodcut - i.e. it needs to be similar for them as then the benefits of advertising it transfer over to the formula.

rainbowweaver - you will find info about formula in the leaflets I linked to above.