Do I really need to start weaning at 6 months?

[Jackaroo]

I know I'm going to shoot myself in the foot for saying this, but after a pretty challenging 5 months, breastfeeding is now going well (touch wood etc etc). DS has always been big, despite dodgy latch, milk supply ebbing at times and many other ishoos inbetween.

So, given that he's so big, and sleeps and happy and all that, will he be missing out on something if I'm a little slow off the mark in weaning him? I'm already planning to go straight into avocado/fruit/veg because as far as I can see rice cereal is pretty much void of anything useful except calories...and it worked for DS1.

DS2 has already got all the signs one is supposed to look for, but he's only 5 months next week, so, whilst the current info here (Oz) is from 4 to 6 months, I'm not taking any notice.

Whaddya think?

Ta

do what you like, he'll soon let you know if he needs solids, and you're not giving them to him. Much worse doing it too soon than too late. As long as your sleep isn't affected

I'm pretty sure the guidelines are at least 6 months old.
If you DS isn't losing weight and is a healthy boy on breastmilk then I dont see a problem.

Do Baby-led weaning and just start by offering him a piece of fruit in the morning as well as his morning BF and go from there.

If your happy and he's happy then I wouldn't worry.

If he was term (so received the iron stores that you laid down at the end of pregnancy) then the chances are he'll be fine if you don't rush to wean.
A study of babies not weaned until 7 months showed they had better reserves of iron than babies weaned before that.
I didn't bother with rice cereal. I went straight to Baby Led weaning this time but rice cereal is fortified with iron so I paid some attention to what other foods were good sources.
Obviously breastmilk does contain iron which is very bioavailable (and therefore it contains much more iron than scientists used to realize) but some additional sources are needed at some point before the end of the first year for most babies.

Thanks all, tambajam, v. useful science, thank you!

I'm going to play it by ear, but good to know I can take my time. he was 39 weeks, but I thinkanything over 37 counts as term?

Cheers

That is term. Some parents who really delay weaning (I know one family who waited until around 11 months as there were severe allergies in the family) have a blood test to check iron levels.

The only thing I might add is that weaning is great fun and a great sensory experience. If you choose to do baby-led weaning it is really just a new way of playing initially and quantities swallowed are pretty small. He could sit at the table and be part of family meals and have something to wave around when you do eventually start.

You might find this interesting:
www.kellymom.com/nutrition/solids/delay-solids.html

I weaned my slightly prem baby at 7 months the baby-led way. It's been great (she's 13 months now) and she loves meals.

I delayed it because a) I don't believe it affects their sleep. Well, it wouldn't touch the sides of my fed-to-sleep Nosferatu); and b) I was moving continent and wanted to get that out of the way.

Some mothers thought I was barmy for waiting.

She tried lots of things from the off particularly fruit and meat but it wasn't in any quantity until month 10, then really took off at month 11. She's a low centile baby and breastfed but stuck to her chart line and has recently slightly, slightly crept up.

Absolutely NO change to sleep patterns (we co-sleep), in fact, if anything, it's got worse.