Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Infant feeding

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

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Any Baby Whisperer gurus out there? Pls come and help me work out how to move from the 3-hour routine to the 4-hour one with a hungry baby??

29 replies

Ceebee74 · 09/03/2009 19:41

DS2 is nearly 16 weeks so, according to the BW, should be moving to a 4-hourly EASY routine now.

He is bottle fed and currently has 5 feeds a day at 3-hourly intervals. He has been having 8oz bottles but is draining at least 2 of those a day and wants more (the other feeds he perhaps takes 6-7 oz) so I am going to make 9oz bottles tomorrow.

If he is not being satisfied with 5 bottles a day and needs feeding 9oz every 3 hours, how on earth am I going to move to only feeding him every 4 hours??

Do I have to make 2 bottles each feed (my bottles only take 9oz) to increase the volume he takes?

Any advice would be very welcome as I am a bit stumped - DS1 was never a hungry baby and we moved to 4-hourly feeds very easily as he was just not that bothered about his milk (and 2-5 years later, he is still not bothered about food )

OP posts:

Monkeyandbooba · 09/03/2009 19:48

leave it for the time being

flourybaps · 09/03/2009 19:52

hiya, I never got onto the four hourly routine with my dd. Is had to feed her 3 hourly (daytime) right up until I weaned her at nearly six months, she was taking 9 oz bottles at each feed.

Only other thing I can think of to stretch feeds out a bit is to try hungry baby milk?

RealityIsMyOnlyDelusion · 09/03/2009 19:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Seona1973 · 09/03/2009 19:53

I waited till ds did it for himself. He did have a night feed till 8 months though even though he went 4 hourly from about 4 months.

nickytwotimes · 09/03/2009 19:53

Mine was always 3 hourly on formula until he was about 6 or 7 mths and eating.

You don't have to feed 4 hrly.

Lulumama · 09/03/2009 19:57

5 bottles a day is not a massive amount for a 4 month old baby

feed when he is hungry, however much he wants/needs and go with the flow.

why do you need to go to every 4 hours? i need a drink at least every 2

if he is draining the 9 oz bottle every feed, then you could try hungry baby milk, or just feed more frequently, it could well calm down, it might be a wee growth spurt

there is not reason he has to feed only every 4 hours,just because a book says so

popsycal · 09/03/2009 20:03

why not just feed when he is hungry/

Sidge · 09/03/2009 20:11

Put the book down and listen to your baby. Give him as much milk as he wants, as often as he wants it. Whether that's 10 ounces every 2.5 hours, or 6 ounces every 4. If he's hungry, he's hungry - if you try and restrict his intake you will have a very grumpy baby on your hands!

Original poster

Ceebee74 · 09/03/2009 20:14

Thanks for the replies

I am a bit of a 'routine' person - that is just the way I am and I like to plan round feeds etc - of course if DS2 is screaming for food I feed him, even if it hasn't been 3 hours - as it happens, that doesn't happen very often.

Lulumama - I know 5 bottles isn't a huge amount but he sleeps through happily and he was never bothered about a dreamfeed either.

I really want to get to 26 weeks before starting to wean and want to do what I can to achieve that. I guess I will play it by ear and, if necessary, feed more often.

OP posts:

SamJamsmum · 10/03/2009 07:29

If you check out the boards of Baby Whisperer you'll see that even the die-hards aren't expecting all babies to get to a 4 hr EASY these days.
Tracy Hogg is obviously not around to amend her ideas but the research from the Hartmann team in Australia which was published after her death really highlight the fact that some mums aren't going to be physically able to get to a 4 hr feeding routine whatever they do.
This is something we've sort of always known based on the fact that when 4 hr feeding routines were pushed as the 'norm' bf rates crashed in this country.
The Hartmann research ultrasounded lots of different breasts and found that duct configuration varied massively and breast storage capacity did have some part to play in feeding intervals (not about breast size). Supply over 24 hrs is roughly the same but some babies will not be able to feed 4 hrly and mums simply make themselves miserable in the process. If you push it too far you will end up with a reduced milk supply, a miserable baby who doesn't sleep well and a baby not putting on weight.
I know Tracy Hogg felt everyone could do it and you just needed to 'stretch' for the baby to take in more milk but this is inaccurate and misleading advice. The breastfeeding moderators on the baby whisperer site now know this to be true thankfully.

Original poster

Ceebee74 · 10/03/2009 08:49

SamJam - that is really useful information - thanks a lot. I guess things have moved on since Tracey Hogg wrote the BW books.

As I don't want a grumpy baby on my hands I will continue with the 3 hour feeds unless he wants more

OP posts:

Lulumama · 10/03/2009 08:54

carry on doing what you are doing, feed him as much as he wants, when he wants, you will find that he has times when he is hungrier than others, babies do have frequent growth spurts.

signs of readiness for solids are detailed on kellymom.com ..

sounds like he is getting enough to be satisfied, and if he is sleeping through then great ! if it ain;t broke, don;t fix it, as the saying goes..

SamJamsmum · 10/03/2009 10:45

I am completely embarrassed at how I was banging on about breastfeeding as if that was information you would find super interesting . Thank you for humouring me!
I just have spent quite a bit of time talking to breastfeeding babywhisperers about this specific 'moving to a 4hr thing' and I am a bit of a stuck record.

If you are really interested in baby whispering I would recommend the main forum/ boards you can access via the website. It's an international community and very supportive. There is a bottle-feeding section too and an 'EASY' board and lots of common sense flying around (although I have my reservations about baby whispering, I can see it helps some people).

Pruners · 10/03/2009 10:58

Message withdrawn

Monkeyandbooba · 10/03/2009 11:11

My DS is 20 weeks and has 6 feeds a day (breast fed) he is happy so I am happy I think the Baby Whisperer has some good ideas but like everything you should take the bits that suit your baby and dump the rest, IMHO

Trinityrhino · 10/03/2009 11:13

you could just try feeding him when he is hungry

standanddeliver · 10/03/2009 12:49

I got a Tracy Hogg book free with a recent baby magazine.

It contained so many inaccuracies and distortions on the subject of breastfeeding, and was so clearly not evidence based that I immediately lost all faith in anything else she might say.

Personally I think encouraging anyone to put babies on 4 hour schedules is very ill advised. Why on earth encourage a baby into this sort of eating pattern when adults are so often being advised against having three huge meals a day, in favour of three smaller meals with snacks in between? Seriously? I would have to stuff my face to maximum capacity to be able to then last four hours before eating and drinking again. Why on earth should babies be able to do this when adults can't (and don't want to because it's much nicer to eat little and often).

tiktok · 10/03/2009 12:55

I have an inbuilt reaction to any book or expert who says what time and with what frequency babies 'should' be feeding - it's an easy way of knowing when they are spouting ill-informed rubbish

Am mystified by the idea that small babies should all be eating the same amount at the same frequency and that there is something wrong if they don't.

Monkeyandbooba · 10/03/2009 12:55

My Ds is on the 99th centile for weight and height and manages 4 hourly feeds but that was his decision if you like! DD however never managed more than 2.5 - 3hrs between feeds until she was on 3 solid meals a day. They are all different.

chequersmate · 10/03/2009 12:58

Never understood why you would need to get a baby on a 3 hour feeding routine.

My DD is 7 months, on 3 meals and still has milk 3 hourly, which a couple of my friends are a bit about. God knows why.

FWIW, I did use the pick up put down technique from the BW and DD now sleeps 12 hours through the night. But everything else in her book was a bit of a crock tbh.

moogmum · 10/03/2009 15:10

I love routines too, and knowing what time it is likely that my baby will want to feed, sleep, etc. But if your son is happy on a 3 hour routine and sleeping through then I would stick to it as everyone else says. I know you say you want to wait till 26 weeks for food but I thought I might just mention that having done quite a lot of research myself on the reasons for the 6 month weaning guidelines (thanks to some pointers to the right info on here) it seems that the main reasons why they changed was because there was evidence from a study in Honduras that there was a slightly increased risk of gastroenteritis if babies were exclusively breastfed for 4 months rather than 6 months. If your son is already formula fed rather than exclusively breastfed then I can't find any evidence that it would make any difference at all to introduce some solid food earlier (though not, of course, until 17 weeks, which is the earliest any food should be introduced). If he really is draining full bottles 5 times a day then a little food alongside might be worth it. There certainly doesn't seem to be any reason why not, as long as you stick to baby rice, carrots, pears etc and not wheat, meat etc.

tiktok · 10/03/2009 15:14

moogmum, you really cannot have read the research if you think the 'main' reason for 6 mth weaning was the Honduras study. Go back and read the whole thing again!

Having said that, people need to know there is no magic date of 26 weeks when all babies should have solids - the precision of the date is an artefact of the research, not a 'command' for eveyone. Many babies will be fine on solids a bit later than this, and many will be fine a bit sooner - it's a developmental stage, not a date on a calendar.

charliegal · 10/03/2009 15:16

Get rid of the book. It is a pile of crap.

Lulumama · 10/03/2009 16:27

a few tastes of baby rice of pear is not going to fill a baby's tummy as effectively, safely and calorifically as an extra milk feed.

yes , the NHS says no solid food before 17 weeks, but also is quite clear that the aim is to start introducing solids around 26 weeks

if a baby is showing physical signs of readiness before then, then great, but i doubt they would be showing those signs at 16 - 17 weeks .

how can a spoon or two of baby rice be more filling or better in terms of calories than an extra 9 oz bottle?

i think some babies fall neatly into feeding 3 -4 hourly and you could almost set your watch by them, but lots don;t and that does not mean anything is wrong

moogmum · 10/03/2009 17:16

Tiktok, thanks but I haven't been able to find anything other than the Kramer study which refers explicitly to 6 rather than 4 months. If you can point me to the other research I'd be really grateful.

Flip

1 2