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?!

Yes of course because weaning your child before 6 months is exactley like killing them with ciggies, thats a very well thought out and rounded argument you have there.

OK, the cigs thing is flippant, but fgs, you say weaning should be done with guidance from respected and trusted sources - who do you think the World Health Organisation are?! The Village People?!

err why doesnt it work?

Seems like a sweeping generalisation to say that following recommendations and guidelines for your baby doesnt work. Is that what you mean?

Okay so here in NZ the major sponsor of our HVs is Heinz Wattie - so now not only can you not believe a single leaflet, or jar or even your HV. They still have things currently in print that say 4-6 months.

Heinz Wattie say all of their food has been tested by Plunket - which is patently rubbish. What it means is they said "We will give you $xmillion if you let us use your logo on our baby food".

And about as well rounded as saying, "well if the company's are doing it and having been picked up on it, it cant be bad, can it".

Ven - what I said doesn't work is saying that every baby in this country should be doing something no sooner than X and before X babies do not work like that.

Hunker - What I have said befor and will say agin is that yes I understand the guidance and reccomendations that are given by the WHO and many other organisations (C&G is not one of them) but I will still decide when is best to wean my child and I really do not give a flying flip what is printed on the side of a glass bottle. The decision as to what age to wean is mine. Weaning your baby at 4 moths is not harmfull to your child it is just more advantageous to wait untill 6 months, that is why by law they are allowed to print suitable from 4 months + on there packaging.

No, they are allowed to print it because they have lots of money and the government doesn't give a shit.

And it can be harmful - and there's no way of telling which children it will harm until it's too late - and it's not instant, problems often surface in adulthood.

Aaahh another conspiracy theory about multi million pound companies and the government, I just keep hearing more and more of these.

Still trying to get over the ciggarette thing to be honest, funny how those companies don't seem to have been able to buy the government buy C&G have.

You also make it sound like weaning from 4 moths is a new thing that should be stamped out, it was the norm untill very very recently so any harm that has been done by it would be pretty obvious in the young adult generation of today.
Unless of course you think it is the food in the pots that could do the harm and not the actual weaning itself.

Anyway I have to get of to bed now, I do understand where you are coming from on this but refuse to agree that it is the huge deal that it is made out to be. I would be interested to continue this another time. I expect that we are both pretty busy though hunker considering I have a 13 week old and you have one even younger.

Hope you have some good sleep, if any at all.

Because obviously we have the healthiest young adult population in history...

Here's a sharp stick, Hunker, so you can prod the thread more easily....

The Gov't lets the food companies put 4-6 months on the jars because

1. maternity pay and leave in this country is piss poor so most mothers who work have to go back before their babies are 6 months old.

2. most working mothers want to be the first person to put food into their babies' mouths, not to let a childminder or nursery nurse do.

It is therefore convenient for the gov't to look the other way regarding food labelling and the food companies are happy to comply. £££ Cynical and true of the gov't

Only since SMP was extended to 26 wks that the gov't start to print public information stating that weaning should be delayed till 6 months. The WHO has recommended this guideline for about 10 years.

The WHO guidelines are 'only guidelines' NOT because they are optional but because WHO does not have any governing power in any country to enact and enforce them.

Hence their guidelines are recommended to governments to make into LAWS.

Cheers, Colditz

Kiskidee, totally agree. Wrote to my MP re paid mat leave only being 26 weeks long and most women not able to afford to stay off unpaid. Got a very woolly "ah well, we're generous as it is" response...

Not read the whole thread but am going to jump in with both feet. The current guidelines are actually to wean between 4 and six months to fall in with the exclusive breast feeding for 6 months where possible. Each child is different and is ready for solids at different times.

The ocassional jar of food if you are stuck timewise is not going to do any lasting harm to a child. In fact it does a lot less harm than being told to just puree what ever you are eating and give it to the children especially if you aren't a good cook and live off processed rubish. Personally I cook and puree my own veggies etc but give an ocassional jar as I have returned to work and it is easier. Just because they sell jars containing meat doesn't mean we have to buy them.

MH, the current guidelines are to wean from six months. If you've been told four-six you've been given the wrong information.

No, I know we don't have to buy the jars containing egg, meat, gluten, fish and cocoa. But if the companies are allowed to put these ingredients into jars aimed at babies who medical advice dictates are too young to be weaned on anything, then mothers will give their babies food that may be completely unsuitable, because a trusted company such as Hipp Organic says they can!

If they put rum in them, we'd not have to buy them either...

I must be way behind the times - I though you were supposed to wean babies at 16 weeks (or at least im sure thats what the health visitor said...)

My point is not what mothers choose to do when armed with all the right information, that is entirely up to them and I bow to a mothers right to do what is best for her baby. My row is with babyfood companies who are allowed to misinform people, leading them to make a decision they may not have made had they not been misinformed.

I think the reason most people don't wait until 6 months to wean is because the 'From 6 Months' advice is relentlessly undermined by profit-seeking babyfood manufacturers.

Tamba, health visiters do sometimes still say that. Some of them are dim though.

(Colditz, I'd have put "what she thinks is best for her baby" but I'm hardline ).

HVs also pressurise mothers to wean early, IME.

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn