another silly comment my hv made 'why are you waiting for that magic day to wean '

[rainbow83]

everytime i go for a weigh in (which is quite rare btw) i seem to have a mental rant about the comments my hv makes.

dd2 is 5.5 months old, on the 75th centile on bfeeding alone. instead of telling me how fantastically well i'm doing with exclusive bfeeding, she said 'you're not waiting for that magic day when they turn 6 months old are you to start giving her some food are you?'. aghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Kiskidee - It' okay, I'm not angry anymore. Just a bit touchy on the subject for obvious reasons.

Message withdrawn

Nope Pruners I wouldn't but then I'm a moderate mummy not an uber mummy so I'm probably wrong

Pruners, if milk feeds are increased (and therefore more nutrition is going into the baby), and the baby still lost weight, I would definitely not introduce food....all solid food is, is calories in another form. It would indicate to me there was something wrong, and I would get the baby's health and development checked.

The purpose of early foods is not to increase the baby's calorie intake, but to introduce the baby to a greater range of tastes and textures and to start adding more iron.

In fact, the research shows pretty clearly that in the early months. the baby's calorie intake remains about the same, and solids tend to replace milk. This is one of the reasons why it's not a good idea to wean too soon - you end up replacing a suitable food (and in the case of breastmilk, the physiologically normal food) with something less easily metabolised and less nutritious. Net calorie intake can even be less with a young baby (under 6 mths) because the solids fill the baby up, and are digested more slowly, so the baby might end up having less milk.

In addition, many early solids are less calorie dense than formula or breastmilk, anyway, so again, the baby ends up with fewer calories.

If it's not possible to increase the baby's intake of milk for some reason, then a baby whose growth is faltering might well benefit from extra food in the form of solids. But it's not a good idea to pretend it's good nutrition.

Pruners...bad mummy here also...wouldnt wait til the exact date either if i felt it was the right thing to do.

When i weaned my DS ahe carried on with exactly the same amount of milk + food on top (and not wallpaper paste, i mean baby rice either).

It is a guideline not the end of the world if you are a bit before or after it.

I can see slightly what the HV meant by the 'magic date'...its the same as how they can't have gluten then they can at 6 months so one it is not ok to have weetabix and the next it is??? Was probably just meant fairly lightheartely rather than as a personal criticism of your parenting.

Also agree rainbow though that your HV should be congratulating you on doing great with BF.

Message withdrawn

I agree, Pruners, that it really is not worth quibbling over the supposed 'best' nutrition when we are talking about 2 weeks...

The 'perfectly healthy' but 'thin' breastfed baby of 5.5 mths probably would benefit from more calories (babies probably shouldn't be thin at 5.5 mths). Giving solids is probably the least efficient way of getting more calories into him, though - solids (as I thought I had explained in my previous post) don't make much difference in terms of calorie intake for a while, unless you deliberately make them very dense, such as giving a lot of baby rice (approximate calorie value = 7 kCal per teaspoon in powdered form) which most mothers (rightly) don't do straight off.

The mum in this siutuation doesn't need to be tearful if she decides to give solids - of course she doesn't. But she does need to know that the easiest, and most nuritionally appropriate way to get a bit of chub onto her baby is to breastfeed more often. She may choose not to do that, and to give solids instead. No big deal, really. OTOH, what would be wrong with explaining to her that getting an extra breastfeed per day down her baby is likely to save her the faff of preparing food for her baby, and give her baby more calories...which is what you are sure this baby needed?

A very small breastfeed of say, 50 mls, will give the baby 35 kCal. A suggested first meal for a baby of this age (I have just checked on the Heinz 'tiny tums' website) is made up of water, 1 courgette, 2 carrots, 2 teaspoons of baby rice. I actually don't think a baby would eat all of this (a whole courgette and 2 carrots??) but even if he did....you do the maths, allowing for 14 KCal for the rice, and probably the same in total for the veg.

Give an extra two small breastfeeds, and that's an extra 70 kCal

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

Not very scientific, Pruners.....her baby might have started to gain anyway. It's not at all unusual for babies' weight to plateau, sometimes for weeks at a time, and for it then to start to move upwards.

Might have been better for that mum not to get her baby weighed. If he was healthy, there was no need. She got upset because he wasn't gaining and was unhappy that she ended up giving solids. You're not going to argue that all that upset was worth it, just to shift a baby up from a weight plateau which may have been totally physiological for that baby....surely?

thats not such a silly comment, many a baby was weaned before 6 months in the past, maybe its not a bad thing

But do you not think it's a silly comment to make when a baby is healthy, thriving and happy, and the mother is happy as well?

And actually, I think what was done in the past is not necessarily a guide to what should be done today.

I could draw up a l....o.....n....g list of examples to back that up, too

Whiskey in the bottle served up with a side order of atmospheric nicotine, anyone??

DS3 now 5 months and on 75th centile. I am getting these type of comments from loads of people although, to be fair, not from the HV but that would be because I haven't seen her since DS3 was 4 weeks old.....

I agree actually that there is no 'magic day'. How can there be?

And my HVs were fab.
And clued in on the 6 month recomendation.
And although we didn't call it BLW, reassured me (and MIL ) that a variety of finger foods was just fine and there was no need to force much into dc's unwilling mouths.

'Course there's no 'magic' day....as if!

Babies can have solids round about the middle of the first year - it's just the research has to be more specific than that, in order to compare outcomes.

Hence the dogmatic-sounding 'guideline'.

But actually, 'on the dot' six months makes no more sense than the previous routine guidance given to mothers which was 'on the dot' four months. The official guidance was 'four to six months' but no HV of my aquaintance ever interpreted it as anything but 'four months' and often, this was translated as '16 weeks'.

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

Yeah - my point is if she hadn't got him weighed as often, this crisis (if that's what it was) would have been ridden out, and she would not have berated herself for using solids.

It is no use, and actually not very kind, to say to mothers, 'don't worry about giving solids at 5.5 mths' because it denies sometimes quite deep feelings, feelings which come from the heart and not the head.

Instead, a better approach is to say 'you are worried about the fact you can see your baby's ribs. He is a healthy baby, but on the slender side, which may be normal for him at this stage....giving solids now at 5.5 mths will not harm him, and from what we know, is unlikely to increase his intake of calories, but you may want to, so you can stop worrying about his nutrition. If you prefer not to, then two weeks without solids will not make any long-term difference, as I can see your baby is healthy. It's up to you. Six months is not a magic date.'

tiktok maybe you should have a slug from the old whisky bottle and you might not be so uptight and annoying

to you too with knobs on ChocolatePenny.

And

Those are sarky s by the way.

Just in case you need it spelling out.

Message withdrawn

Glad to hear it, Pruners.

of course there is no magic day. I actually dont even want to start at 6 mo's.

she assumed i was waiting for her 6 month mark to start feeding, when actually i'm not 'cause i just dont feel dd is ready yet, she's on a great routine and often sleeps through, she's contented and thriving, really why do i want to meddle with that?

the 6 month guideline is a saving grace really coz then whenever my mum , MIL, HV ask me why i've not started i can always say 'well its not recommended before 6 months'. Said HV also said 'she's got a lovely strong back there, i think she's ready to start sitting up for some breakfast'. don't the LLL guidelines state that they should be sitting UNSUPPORTED? the 6 month mark IMO is the bare minimum. isn't it?

I put off weaning dd until after we had got back from our camping holiday. Seemed easier. Then I just forgot to do it. She made her feelings on the matter pretty clear when at pushing 7 months she grabbed a piece of bread off my plate and stuck it in her mouth with, it has to be said, quite a belligerent expression

CP - is tiktok annoying you because she is right, perchance?