Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Infant feeding

Get advice and support with infant feeding from other users here.

Original poster

Whats your view on this breastfeeders?

56 replies

littleducks · 09/08/2006 20:18

Extract from Boots Parenting Club Magazine, Issue Two:Crib to Cot (p39 'Making it Simple, 10 things you never knew about weaning')

'2 All babies develop at different rates
Both the Department of Health and The World Health Organisation recommend that babies are exclusively breastfed for 26 weeks (6 months). But what if your baby seems very hungry at around 5 months and extra milk feeds aren't helping?'If hes showing all the signs of being ready to take solids and doesnt clamp his mouth shut or turn his head away when offered them, you should carry on with breatfeeding him and slowly start to wean' says Angela, 'However if your baby isn't willing to take solids and is tailing off on the growth front then a small addition of formula milk in addition to breastfeeding might be advisable'

There is a bit more if anyone wants to see context but i didnt want post to be even longer. I'm concerned about the addition of formula aspect, but as my dd is only 3 months i didn't want to get on my high horse without consulting more experienced mums.

OP posts:
mimoyello · 10/08/2006 18:11

Sorry, my link didn't work.

The address is: www.babymilkaction.org

mimoyello · 10/08/2006 18:15

Littleducks - perhaps you can send a copy of the article to BMA and they will take it up with Boots. They are always interested in hearing about such things and publish any violations on their website.

VeniVidiVickiQV · 10/08/2006 18:25

Interesting that.

A subtle suggestion that follow on milk might just be appropriate. Yeahrite.

FFS. Maybe they think breastfeeding addles our brains or something.

nuckingfutjob · 10/08/2006 18:34

tiktok, it may not be brain surgery, but it would seem that some HVs have had theirs removed...

VeniVidiVickiQV · 10/08/2006 19:44

Yes. Didn't you know? As part of their training they have a partial lobotomy, whereby their ability to retain new information is taken away, and a money magnet is inserted. Allegedly.

asur · 10/08/2006 19:51

I read that mag yesterday too and noticed that nice piece of advice then promptly put it in the bin... typical HV..

at allegedly VVV - maybe that should be added to the end of all posts just to be on the safe side! hehe

mawbroon · 10/08/2006 20:55

I get annoyed with the Boots parenting stuff that gets sent to me. NONE of it is of any use to me at all. Vouchers for nappies (I use cloth) vouchers for baby toiletries (I don't use), vouchers for jars of food (don't use did BLW) etc etc. The Bounty weaning pack was the same and I gave most of it away to the mums at our baby group.

When I read stuff like that in magazines etc, I normally show it to DH. Even he knows about the WHO guidelines and that supplementing with formula can cause supply issues which is more than Angela seem to.

asur · 10/08/2006 21:11

I totally agree with the vouchers thing - total waste. The only vouchers I've used were in the original welcome pack thing and that's coz it was for stuff for me (conditioner, body lotion etc..)

Tesco babyclub is the same. I got my latest copy the other day, it's called "your baby: 3-6 months" and although it says at the start that WHO recommend breastfeeding for the first 6 months, the whole magazine is about weaning! Even the vouchers are for baby food but they expire when my DS will only be 18 weeks old! Crazy..

asur · 11/08/2006 21:01

I have just dug the magazine out so that I could send a comment to them so anyone who is interested in doing the same, here are the details:

Parenting club magazine issue 2: crib to cot
article: 10 things you never knew about weaning on page 39. point 2 is where littleducks got the quote from.

contact email is: [email protected]

And it does say that they value opinions

asur · 04/09/2006 14:05

for anyone who is interesting, I just got a reply from Boots about my comments on this article.

"Thank you for your email regarding our feature '10 things you never knew about weaning'. We are totally committed to breastfeeding, and would never wish to undermine a mother's choice to feed her baby naturally. In this article do point out the Department of Health and World Health Organisation's recommendation to exclusively breastfeed babies for six months. However, babies can develop at different rates, and the article intended to give worried mums some potential solutions to talk over with their health visitor. As this has caused confusion, we have recently revised all our magazines and this advice is no longer part of our editorial. In Angela's defence, I think she was referring to a child who is really failing. In this case, I know some doctors and health visitors do recommend introducing a little formula, to avoid the child becoming dangerously undernourished.

Again, thank you for your comments"

Nice to know they've changed it

yellowrose · 04/09/2006 14:20

asur - that's good news. I would like them to say in all their publications that WHO in fact recommends bf for AT LEAST TWO years because that is how long it takes for a child's immune system to reach a reasonable level. WHO/UNICEF also recommend that no water, food or formula should be introduced before 6 months. It is sad that the NHS does not harp on about these enough to become common knowledge and the companies abuse this fact to sell their products. I am appalled that baby food jars still say "from 4 months" on them, in some countries this is banned.

yellowrose · 04/09/2006 14:25

Oh and perhaps Angela should point out that a baby fed on demand on breastmilk will not become undernourished and that any such deficiency can be resolved with MORE breastmilk not just formula ! The only undernourished bf baby I have ever known was given dummies every time he cried. If he had been given the breast instead of a dummy so frequently he would not have been undernourished and unable to thrive.

LaDiDaDi · 04/09/2006 16:10

it's great to hear that they've changed it. Thanks for posting and letting us know .

WeaselMum · 19/09/2006 11:30

just to let you all know that I received my copy of this magazine today and the same advice is still in it - guess they're still using up their stocks? Or maybe they haven't changed it at all and figured no-one would notice since you don't get sent the same magazine twice?

milward · 19/09/2006 22:31

Like the bit about "dangerously undernourished" - what rubbish - definately go to the BabyMilk Action group to get this sorted.

sorrell · 19/09/2006 22:39

Has anyone actually read the research? There is no evidence that weaning at five months or even four damages children. Before then, maybe. After? Maybe not. THink six months is a good idea, but it isn't the law.

sorrell · 19/09/2006 22:40

Btw my nearly two year old haas loads of teeth but I still breastfeed...

hunkermunker · 19/09/2006 22:43

Sorrell, are you saying that weaning early (ie before 6m) is a good plan then?

Why would the WHO say 6m?

I've read enough to convince me that 6m and onwards is better and before 6m can be harmful.

edam · 19/09/2006 22:45

It's the advice from the WHO who have actually reviewed all the evidence using proper research methods, though, Sorrell. Has a much better basis in evidence than some ill-informed health visitor who just digs into her bag of prejudices...

sorrell · 19/09/2006 22:49

Read the studies. It's not as clear cut as you thnk.

Jimjams2 · 19/09/2006 22:56

sorrell did you post the other day about this? Is it something like its of great benefit in certain areas of the world, makes little difference in others but they made the advice worldwide? Or did I dream reading that?

edam · 19/09/2006 22:59

Well yes, Sorrell, I have, thanks very much. The problem here is that you've got someone who using her professional status to give poor advice. We can debate early weaning all we like as two anonymous posters on MN - neither of us has made any claims to expertise. Different to an HV speaking as the voice of authority.

hunkermunker · 19/09/2006 23:00

Which studies, Sorrell?

What I have read (and I've read a fair bit) has convinced me that weaning early is unnecessary and can cause harm.

I do think that food is unnecessary for babies before 6m and probably not that necessary in large quantities before a year, really.

hunkermunker · 19/09/2006 23:00

Different from, Edam

edam · 19/09/2006 23:03

Oh bum is clearly past my bed-time. I spend all day at work being pedantic about this kind of stuff (and talking to expert reviewers as it happens). Sigh...