Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Weaning

Find weaning advice from other Mumsnetters on our Weaning forum. Use our child development calendar for more information.

Original poster

Big baby = early weaning

35 replies

RillaBlythe · 21/01/2012 22:53

can someone explain why this is? I've seen several references over the years to having to start solids because baby was big & therefore hungry.

I've had two big babies, dd1 was literally off the chart at 6 months, & dd2 is 98th percentile at 4.5 mths. But I don't get why that would mean I would wean earlier as they are clearly growing & thriving on milk.

Just wondering & not trying to be contentious never posted in here, hope it's not a hot button topic

OP posts:
NewYearsRevolution · 21/01/2012 22:57

Because people like to problem solve? You need to wean early because a baby is big. Or because they are small. You need to cuddle them less because they are clearly spoiled and that's why they are restless...

vj32 · 22/01/2012 16:36

We started weaning ds at just over 5 months. He is a huge baby (now well above 99% weight line!!) but we started weaning early because he showed the signs of being ready, not because of size. He could sit unaided, pick up and put food in his mouth, and had lost the tongue thrust reflex. When offered a bit of puree as a test he moved it round his mouth and swallowed - didn't spit any out.

I don't know whether bigger babies tend to develop sooner when they are young, or at least in a different way? My ds could hold his head up and sit up very early but was slow to learn to roll.

I did use the argument that he was thriving on milk when people kept telling me he must be ready for food, I must be struggling to feed him enough etc Loads of people made those kind of comments so maybe some people start believing it!

buggyRunner · 23/01/2012 06:24

I waited with dd1 who was 25tg centile until 6 months, dd2 75th we did at 20 weeks. We were advised by health professionals and she was ready. Literally she was bfeeding every hour and showing signs above. She loves her food.

seeker · 23/01/2012 06:34

Just one of the many excuses people use to ignore the guidelines that hve been in place for nearly 10 years. Completely baffling. Some people carry early weaning as a badge f honour- not sure whether they feel they have somehow beaten the system, or proved how advanced their babies are...it's just odd,

NoFoodwithaFace · 23/01/2012 11:26

I started weaning my son at 17 weeks and I find it very insulting for you to say that seeker. I have decided to breast feed my son, and have found it particuarly easy, and therefore don't judge people that chose to ff as they may have had a rougher time than me. Just as you shouldn't judge people who wean earlier.

My DS is MASSIVE. I don't think that has anything to do with it, by 16 weeks, any time there was food around he would scream the place down. It got to a point where we'd have to eat our dinner when he wasn't looking or had gone down for a nap. He was waking between every hour and every half hour. I spoke to the health visitor who was very unhelpful. I then took him to the GP and showed her a photo of DS at 15 weeks, reaching out for the food on my plate. She said that since he could sit up well, was clearly interested in food and obviously needed it if he was waking that much.

So we started him on a bit of baby porridge and he is now a 5 month old content baby. So seeker I'm not shoving huge dinners down his kneck, and I don't think I'm somehow "beating the system" and think you need to be careful what you say because you are very rude and this is very much a similar topic to bf/ff. Let people make their own choices and don't be so judgemental just because you're child made it to 6 months!

seeker · 23/01/2012 11:31

Glad you know better than the World Health Organisation!

And who mentioned bf/ff??? Not me!

NoFoodwithaFace · 23/01/2012 11:34

yes I do know MY baby better than the world health organisation actually!

StarlightMcKenzie · 23/01/2012 11:37

If a baby is hungry then nothing has more calories than milk (at least nothing you would give a baby) except for avocado. Just give more milk.

I think one of the problems people face at around the 4 month mark is that they feel their baby's 'ought' to be in some kind of routine and therefore cannot possibly want any more milk, it must be something else.

Waking in the night is a sign that they want more milk. Reaching for food is equivelant to reaching for a cigarette. They don't know what it is, they just want to explore it, and (with the exception of the cigarrette and other potentially dangerous things) there is no reason why you shouldn't let them explore these things pre-six months and so what if they put them in their mouths?

But they don't NEED food.

seeker · 23/01/2012 11:38

So you can tell from the outside how mature your baby's gut is? You can tell whether or not yours is one of the few who will suffer from early weaning? That must make life easier for you. Wish I could.

buggyRunner · 23/01/2012 11:40

All medical professionals who have seen my dd2 advised me to wean early- I was devastated as with dd1 I loved doing blw but knew that I needed to follow their advice. Dd2 was bfeeding hourly and never content. Also she wolfed down the puree.
So what should I have done- gone against my gp and health visitors (3 of them) advice?
I still feel guilty but dd2 is healthy and happy.

seeker · 23/01/2012 11:44

But purses are much lower in calories than milk. Why on earth would you give a hungry baby something with fewer calories in it?

StarlightMcKenzie · 23/01/2012 11:44

All health professionals advised me to wean ds early too as he was a)big and b)feeding all the frigging time.

And I read a bit on here and I delayed a bit but eventually gave in.

With ds 2 I read more on here and read the research and realised that all the health professionals who advised me the first time round were shamefully out of date with their knowledge and so I weaned much much later.

StarlightMcKenzie · 23/01/2012 11:45

Has chocolate got fewer calories in it?

StarlightMcKenzie · 23/01/2012 11:45

What about chocolate purses?

seeker · 23/01/2012 11:46

Purses? purees obviously!

seeker · 23/01/2012 11:47

Oooh, I fancy some chocolate puree!

EdlessAllenPoe · 23/01/2012 11:47

there is no harm in weaning at 17 weeks (in this country) ...

if you are finding feeding a chore, then surely it is better to add solids than chuck in BF altogether?

becuase i know a few people who have gone over to FF (then 'hungry baby' etc) at the 4 month+ mark

FWIW my first baby was first to wean, but my largest was last...different circs, different babies.

Sidge · 23/01/2012 11:50

I don't understand that logic either.

Surely a jumbo baby got that big on milk alone already, so why think they need anything other than more milk?

It's totally illogical to me - if you want to lose weight then eat fruit, veg and rice.

And what do people give babies when they think they need food? Fruit, veg and rice.

StarlightMcKenzie · 23/01/2012 11:54

Mayonaise?

NoFoodwithaFace · 23/01/2012 11:57

We are a vegan family so very interested in nutrition and health. I made an educated decision based on my GP's advice and my own research to give my baby solids at 4 months.
As a result I have a more content baby that is full and manages to sleep for 4 hour stretches at night in between feeds. I don't think he should be in a routine, but I do think that he needed bigger stretches of sleep as he was always tired.

NoFoodwithaFace · 23/01/2012 11:58

my only optionss were ff till 6 momnths or bf and introduce solids. we made the deciision and think you all need to get off you blw high horses!

Sidge · 23/01/2012 12:05

Nothing to do with BLW NoFood the OP was talking about 'early weaning'.

That tends to mean before 17 weeks as far as I'm concerned.

Can't speak for other posters of course.

NewYearsRevolution · 23/01/2012 12:06

NoFoodwithaFace - I understand your point, but you said yourself in your first post that you don't think your DS's size had anything to do with it.

I totally agree that some babies will be ready for solids earlier than others. But it's about assessing genuine readiness (and not starting at 10 weeks like my parents did with me Hmm) and the actual baby. The OP is asking why people say "Oh, he's big, so I had to wean early". When in fact, they are probably two totally separate statements: "My son is big. My son was ready for solids early so we started weaning at X weeks".

I don't have anything against people making an educated decision on when to wean, but I do worry about a culture that sends the incorrect message to women that, if their baby is big, that means they will need to wean early. Only an anecdote, but my big baby was ready for solids far later than my small one. You sound like you made an educated decision you are happy with, based on your baby's needs and not simply his size. Which is the way it should be Smile.

EdlessAllenPoe · 23/01/2012 12:06

and veg purees have fewer calories. baby rice& Bm has around double.
avocado i used as a weaning food precisely because of high calorie content...

really the weaning advice should be :wean at some point chosen by yourself between 17-26weeks...

EdlessAllenPoe · 23/01/2012 12:13

..or consider earlier if you are having problems, aware of the associated uplift in gastrointestinal ailments (though this is still relatively slight)

it is unknown whether gut-maturity is driven by introduction of new food or not. currently under study i believe!