Petits Filous "Suitable from 4 months"

[morningpaper]

I mean REALLY. It's a pot of sugar! Jolly nice but hardly a first food, is it?!

i completely see your point Colditz - that if you wean your baby before six months, better to stick to fruit and veg than anything with meat/gluten etc.

GSL - I don't think the WHO have recommended weaning at 6 mths because that's their opinion. It's surely based on valid medical research?

Colditz - butternut squash and veg.

GSL, have I said anyone is a bad parent?

Yes, the WHO are just a bunch of people. They are a bunch of professional people who work towards health. Cow and Gate are a profit making organisation. I am of the opinion that companies like Cow and Gate shouldn't be allowed to openly contradict the WHO's weaning guidelins.

reading posts from ff mothers sometimes makes me wonder if they are under the impression that the gut of ff babies mature earlier than that of bf babies. Hence it is ok to wean at 4 months.

the other impression I get is that because drinking a lot of formula is expensive, weaning earlier is an advantage. Tho if you go down the jar route, it has got to be even more expensive than just mixing up more formula.

and for HV saying that when a baby loses weight due to illness to wean to 'pad' him out. what an ignoramus. can't see how fruit puree and baby rice has more calories than milk.

and surely so is their MMR advice... which MANY people would say is flawed....

i am playing devils advocate. I weaned early because I felt ds needed it, but I had fully intended to go 6 months... it just didn't work like that.

I just don't get the whole "but the WHO say so"... well... so what?

fof is a hv - she said i was wrong to use cow's milk for cooking (ds was 6.5 months at the time), we looked at the rows of jars full of various egg meat and crap and she said 'oh sorry i must be wrong'.

now i know all about hvs but really, if they are looking in boots for their weaning info we are even more doomed than i'd thought.

kiskidee i think that is true actually.
because a formula fed baby has already had "other" stuff in the gut... the benefits of weaning later are not as clear cut.

now someone on here did back that up and i THINK it may have been hunker or nqc on another thread

The only reason they changed it to 6 months is so that it doesn't clash with the advice given about breast feeding. It is fine to wean at 4 months if you want to, what you choose to wean them on is a totally different subject.

kis, thats what she said.
he can have mash and i should add cream and butter to it.
i did not put cream in, but i did put a bit of butter in it.
but mostly he just had butternut squash.
i feel really bad now for not listening to myself.

she also said use cows milk in cooking.

GSL. can you find some medical research that backs up that claim? Otherwise, I can't see how it is true. It is a foriegn substance that (like food) irritates the lining of the gut so I can't see how it makes the gut mature faster. From what I have read, there is nothing that will make a human body mature faster than it will do by genetic control or by artificial hormones.

but i think the feeling behind it is that a formula fed baby has already had foreign substances in it.

so hanging off feeding for longer won't make as much of a difference?

I haven't really researched it myself, but am sure it was either hunker ot nqc who said they thought it was true as well... they're more researched on the matter than me! lol

it isn't making the gut mature faster.

but it is a maturing gut that makes the gut ready for other foriegn substances other than bm or formula. That is one of the reasons why cow's milk is adapted - to make it easier to digest - not just to chuck more nutrients that humans need.

Flutterbee, that's not true about the only reason they changed it to six months.

It's because a baby's gut is not mature enough for anything but milk until 6 months.

There are arguments for formula-fed babies having other foods before then, partly because formula is a one-taste substance and breastmilk changes according to what the mother's eaten/drunk.

Weaning before 6 months increases the risk of allergies.

The WHO base their recommendations on research. Cow & Gate et al base their recommendations on profit.

I think, and i may be speaking out of turn here, but the WHO arent just "a set of people", they are a set of "experts" who have researched weaning with more than just a gaggle of babies.......

And im not entirely sure what MMR's have to do with this, and what the "flaws" are...

Well surely if C&G were doing something really that bad and wrong (and all other baby food manufacturers) then they would be pulled up on it by Trading Standards.

As someone pointed out earlier the WHO give advise on lots of other things and I am sure that you don't follow everything they say to the letter, we pick and choose what suits us.

As I said in a previous post I don not care what the "guidlines are (because they are only guidlines) I will wean my child at whatever age I feel is best.

Ah.Must be true then....

t
h
u
n
k

FB, they sell cigarettes legally too.

Are you suggesting FB can wean her LO onto cigs whenever she feels like it too Hunker?

Probably best to start with a filter-tip and move on to rollies though.

Yes they do with huge great warnings on them now telling you that you will die if you smoke, I am in agreement with this action and if the reccomended weaning age is also such a huge problem then I would whole heartedley support such action.

All I am saying is that this is not as bigger deal as we are making it out to be. Weaning should be down to the individual with carefull guidance by respected and trusted sources NOT something that must be done by X and never before X that in the world of babies as we all know just doesn't work.

and best not buy them from dodgy street sellers. A set of people said they they contain more chemicals, apparently. Although its probably less likely to affect the ff.