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

Weaning

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

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

Help! Can I start weaning at 3 months?

62 replies

Nickikate · 27/02/2006 16:18

I am a first time mum, with only 1 friend with a baby :( A few mums at baby cafe have told me I can start weaning at 3 months, (and that they have done so) but I think that its supposed to be 4 months. I would like to try it, to see if it fills him up more, and maybe (here's hoping) will help him go thru' the night - he's still waking at 3am ish every night even if he has 5 x 7oz bottles thru the day! (he's 14.5 pounds)
Any advice would be very much appreciated!

OP posts:

mojomummy · 27/02/2006 23:04

i just don't understand why the message of weaning from 6 mths isn't getting through - what are the HV doing ??!!

It's all very well saying we survived - well, do you know how you're health is going to be later in life, what's in store for your children because of early weaning/poor nutrition ?

I just don't get what the rush is .......bowing out now, because this gets to me every time...

nulnulcat · 27/02/2006 23:19

i spoke to health visitor and peaditrician and with there go ahead i weaned at about 4 months but before i get shouted at dd had reflux and couldnt keep feeds down and solids helped

lahdeedah · 27/02/2006 23:25

Hi Nickikate - I started my DD on baby rice at 4.5 months, because she was a big baby and had started waking more frequently during the night having slept through (10pm-7am) from 2 months onwards.

However, I found that it made no difference at all to the night wakings!! it just made more work for me to do during the day.

It took until 7 months before she became more settled during the night again, and now at 11 months she is a champion sleeper.

Next time I will definitely wait until 6 months. It might mean feeding a bit more frequently, but much easier to offer the boob or a bottle, than faff about mixing up baby rice or pureeing vegetables.

tiktok · 28/02/2006 10:38

ajg, the advice doesn't change every couple of years. 3 years ago, the guidance changed to 6 months. It had been 4-6 months (in most circumstances) for about 20 years before then.

Where do you get your 'every couple of years' from?

VeniVidiVickiQV · 28/02/2006 12:09

Agree tiktok.

I happen to think that when someone comes here asking for advice on important topics such as weaning that people take time and think twice about giving advice along the lines of "it never did mine any harm".

The World Health Organisation recommend 6 months and have done for some time. They have no hidden agenda and do not work for any government.

We should be giving out the most up to date information - there are very good and valid reasons for recommending 6 months as already stated. No one is saying anyone who weaned before 6 months are bad mothers.

ajg · 28/02/2006 12:57

Tiktoc,every couple of years was the wrong way ot saying what i mean,the advice we get from hv changes from your first baby to your second.4 months was the age when DD was weaned,now with DS its 6.

Abbs · 28/02/2006 13:20

I have to agree with AJG in the fact that ways change every so often. I have a 3 and half month baby boy who I have started weaning. Every baby is different and no babies are the same so how can you have 1 rule?

NotQuiteCockney · 28/02/2006 13:49

I'm sure babies vary in when they're ready for weaning. Some aren't actually ready at 6 months. Maybe some are ready a few weeks before. But the gut just isn't ready for solid foods much before then.

I weaned my DS1 at 16 weeks, as the advice (more or less) was in those days. It was a giant waste of time. Put in pureed sweet potato, get out slightly dirtier pureed sweet potato. And that's ignoring whatever damage I might have done to his gut or immune system.

VeniVidiVickiQV · 28/02/2006 14:21

Its not one rule, its a set of guidelines based on extensive research on many many babies.

I really think we should be doing right by new posters by handing out the most up to date recommendations.

edam · 28/02/2006 14:33

Abbs, you are right that every baby is different, but the thing is none of us can see inside our babies' intestines in microscopic detail, so you don't actually know if their gut has closed early. By six months it's pretty certain that it will have closed. So that's why it's important not to wean early.

The open gut of a tiny baby is designed to allow nutrients to pass through easily so they can absorb everything they need from milk. When babies are ready for solids the gut closes to be more like an adults. If you give a tiny baby solids, particles of food will pass through the walls of their gut, straight into their bloodstream, rather than being properly digested. That can predipose children to allergies. There has been a huge increase in allergies over the past thirty years. They can be dangerous - even life-threatening in terms of asthma and anaphylactic shock. So I'd think that it's worth hanging on for a few weeks to avoid exposing your baby to unnecessary risk.

OK, our mothers used to wean earlier. But they also used to give babies gripe water containing alcohol and all other sorts of things most people today would think were highly dodgy!

intergalacticwalrus · 28/02/2006 14:44

NikiKate, I am at the mum at your baby cafe who weaned her baby at 2 and a half months!

Being a first time mum is hard work. I would go with the others who said that weaning at 6 months is probably the best advice. I weaned my DS at 6 months, and it didn't really do anything to help his sleeping. I think that is a bit of a misnomer to be honest. At this age, they are getting all the calories they need from milk, and you would probably be better to give your baby extra milk, if he wants it, at this stage.

For what it's worth, I think your baby is sleeping really well. I think we expect far too much from them. Don't listen to what other mothers at baby cafe tell you about sleep, as the chances are they are spinning you a yarn! I learnt that lesson early on!

tiktok · 28/02/2006 16:45

Abbs, did you not read my post where I explained how infrequently the guidance changes?

Of course babies have individual needs, but it's a very rare individual who needs anything other than milk at 3.5 months. There's plenty of evidence that it can be harmful - though no one can predict which babies will be affected in what way.

Apart from that - it's a hassle! Messing about with spoons and purees and mixing up rice and tipping it in, and wondering if he wants some more or if he's had too much and will it put him off his milk and what if he's sick on it and is it ok to mix something else in or is he too young....jeezus.....just leave it as late as you can and they more or less feed themselves :)

Abbs · 28/02/2006 17:52

All i think Nickikate is that when your baby is ready you will know. I know mine is, he is sleeping all through the night from 8 until 8 and has 4 bottles a day plus now baby rice for that extra bit. If feeding them before 6 months is so bad, then why haven't they taken the food off the supermarket shelves that recommend from 4 months plus?

ajg · 28/02/2006 18:09

Abbs this is a very good point,why r they still putting on labels from 4 months,especially as the age for weaning changed as long as 3 years ago.

LIZS · 28/02/2006 18:28

because they can... see the Organix thread. It is all profit after all and can be advertised to promote brand name like Follow on Milk .

Smellen · 28/02/2006 18:31

With reference to Abbs' point about food labelled "from 4 months"...

A quick look at the NCT leaflet (link posted below) suggests that the optimum situation is to wean at 6 months - the Department of Health says that breastfeeding is "nutritionally adequate" till then. A minimum starting age of four months was reiterated, suggesting that for some babies, earlier weaning may be appropriate. It goes on to say though that one study found no growth advantage in starting solids early, and another that exclusive breastfeeding reduces the risk of gastrointestinal infection (but that there was no "significant differences" in conditions such as eczema on babies weaned at 4 and 6 months.)

However, the same document states the advantages of exclusive breastfeeding as the maturation of the digestive tract and development of the immune system. (Where this leaves bottlefed babies, I don't know!!)

Seems to suggest though that the sky won't fall in if you do wean after 4 months, waiting till 6 months is better. However, the original post was about weaning at 3 months - and the current advice is clearly against that.

HTH.

RedZuleika · 28/02/2006 19:03

I don't understand why one would believe a baby food manufacturer with an axe to grind and a profit to make, over the World Health Organisation - who have actually done some research.

Yes, I think you have to take your baby's cue - and if mine indicates that the time is ripe for solids at 5 and a half months, then I'll have a go. But I don't believe that she would deviate so much from the average as to be ready at 3 and a half months.

Hasn't the WHO been saying this for quite some time anyway? And it's only in the last 3 years that the UK Department of Health has fallen into line, following changes to maternity leave?

Smellen · 28/02/2006 19:12

Now that's an interesting point - whether the dept of health guidelines have extended the optimum period for exclusive bf-ing to 6 months only now when paid Maternity Leave (and I use that term loosely, as Statutory Maternity Pay is risible) has been extended to 26 weeks. If that's the case, it's pretty scarey.

Going off on a tangent here. Should go and make dinner instead :)

geekgrrl · 28/02/2006 19:31

it's been said for ages.
How can you rely on your HV to tell you when to start something so important and with such possibly disastrous consequences such as celiacs' disease or IBS?!
If you can use Mumsnet, you can find up-to-date research from reputable sources like the WHO.
My eldest will be 7 this year and I knew when she was a baby that weaning before 6 months is bad - no effing blaming the HV please.

geekgrrl · 28/02/2006 19:32

(that rant is not aimed at the original poster, btw)

hunkermunker · 28/02/2006 19:41

Where were you lot on the "4 months is fine and never did me any harm" Organix thread today, eh?!

geekgrrl · 28/02/2006 19:43

I was there! But held back :)

Boiling over now though.

RedZuleika · 28/02/2006 20:09

I've only just seen it! (Husband away on business, possibly teething baby fractious and squealy and won't go to sleep, dog campaigning for dinner - which I haven't had myself yet. Anyone for a glass of wine...?)

I sent an email to the Vegetarian Society over a month ago now, pointing out to them that nowhere did their weaning information suggest that exclusive breastfeeding for six months was advised. They have yet to do me the courtesy of an acknowledgement.

P0SSUM · 28/02/2006 20:15

christ! dont have a go at people because they assume HV know what they are talking about. its a pretty reasonable assumption if you ask me.

RedZuleika · 28/02/2006 20:30

Personally, I wouldn't take advice from someone without knowing what qualifies them to speak on the subject. I haven't had a great deal of contact with my health visitor, but the first time she came here she told me that she had been a nurse in SCBU and had recently trained as a health visitor.

I still wouldn't take advice from just the one source though - I'd prefer to have my own rootle and tootle through the internet and hopefully find information with a researched basis.

Flip

1 2 3

Swipe left for the next trending thread