WILL I BE SHOT AT DAWN!

[mish2]

I have read all the advice on weaning and know all what goes with it, i weaned my dd at 14 weeks 4 yrs ago ad she is fit and well and healthy. My dds is 15 weeks and 15lb and does not take his milk well, he fights each feed and i have tried everything, if left to his own devises he will take anyhting from 3 -7 oz per feed but generally only the 7 if forced - averaging about 28oz in a 24 hr period with one or 2 night wakings. He is a happy chappy until feeding and it has become so stressful that yesterday after a 11am fight and condecding at 2 oz i made up some baby rice and offered him it - he loved it and was like a bird. Should i cont today and until 17 weeks with just baby rice at one feed or should i just go for it? I am taking to get weighed tomo. I expect some of you will be quite alarmed at starting to wean early but you havent been fighting my son for 15 weeks!

Don't feel guilty saltire - you followed the best, most up-to-date advice you were given at the time, which is all any of us can do.

Its not regimented regs though - it is gut development.

I still feel guilty about my week early with DS.

Saltire - that is like feeling guilty for smoking when people didn't know the risks/for getting imms during pregnancy when doctors thought it was a bright idea. You follow the information you have, and can't feel bad about the consequences - ignoring the the information is a different thing.

mish2, I'm thrilled you have excellent bowels, but you're only one person.
The studies were done across hundreds and thousands of individuals.

Whether it's a risk you want to take for ds is your decision.

Are you really thrilled MrsB?

Mish, i had to report your post because it had some unsavoury language in it

here is a handy little document to read before you speak with your hv tommorrow, mish.

and here is another.

Do you really think that the likes of Lorraine Kelly know more about infant development and weaning than the World Health Organisation?

Presenting GMTV obviously makes her very qualified

No dont be silly and please dont patronise me Lorraine Kelly is just a book i have from when i did it all 4 yrs ago, i simply placed a thread on for some friendly advice, some i have got and some i have found quite hostile. Having read the docs i was sent i can see why weaning should be delayed and i will not be weaning my son as early as i did my daughter as per the advice available at the time. Yes yesterday he had a spoon of baby rice which isnt that unehard of i am sure but i will not go down that path now again until i have sorted his milk feeding out as i dont want him to reduce it further. Thankyou to those who were helpful and not to those who have made me feel like s* for even asking.

well, you did ask in a somewhat defensive and abrasive manner, tbh.

i think that VVVQV's point about the silent reflux really might be worth following up, and also can i ask how you make your bottles up? and are you 'demand feeding' with the bottles or feeding to any sort of timings?

It wasn't meant to patronise you, I was merely asking a question.

You stated that weaning books from certain "gurus" say 4-6 months. I'm just making a point that Lorraine Kelly (for example) does not have any qualifications and so whether they say 4mths or 4 years is surely irrelevant?

On a sidenote, my dd has silent reflux and it's taken a major battle to get it properly diagnosed and treated. Have a look at this link here and see if the symptoms described sound like they fit. If not you've not lost anything, and if it does sound like it fits you have something to discuss with a GP

i have a gp's appt for this afty and will enquire re : silent reflux. bottles made up as need them by adding powder to the water i made up earlier as per instructions. I was going to a structured day of half 7, 11, 2, 5 and 7 but as some feeds he hardly takes or refuses i now follow this rather loosly and awit for him to demand it befoer i offer but it is loosly around those timings with night feeds on demand. Anyway i have exhausted this now and will await to see what the profs say this pm.

Hi Mish - I started weaning at 4 mths with my ds - it turned him into a happier baby and me into a happier mummy instantly. I appreciate all the research and all the gurus have probably gathered some amazing data. But I am more convinced by me and my siblings (all healthy - all weaned at 3 months .... gasp!!) and the arguement that all babies are individual and have varying needs. My DS was a big baby and seemed permanently hungry before weaning. If my DD shows signs of being ready sooner than the recommended 6 months I wouldn't hesitate to give her some baby rice too. Try not too worry too much and good luck with whatever you decide to do x

thankyou misschaos - i dont think he has reflux i think he just isnt a milk lover ! good luck too!

GP advised that if milk feeds are not improving over next couple of days trying to feed on demand to wait till 17 weeks at least to get over the allergy reasearch thingy but going on size and age should be ok anyway and as no history of allergies, asthma etc. but best to introduce slowly baby rice over next two weeks if have too till reach 17, then just fruit and veg till 6 months. Seems sensible to me. He seemed to know his stuff and was very reassuring. Reflux doubtful as a good sleeper and not overly sick and doesnt seem to be in pain just refuses as if doesnt like. The end.

The change in breast-feeding policy in England,
Northern Ireland and Wales has caused
concern. Some experts believe the scientific
evidence upon which the change in policy was
based is largely applicable to developing coun-
tries [99,100], that there is no real evidence of
health benefits associated with delaying weaning
until 6 months [98], and no real evidence of
harm through the introduction of solid foods after
4 months [99?101]. The change in policy does
not allow for individual variability in growth,
developmental and nutritional needs, and it does
not consider the special needs of certain sub-
groups of infants [99,102]. It is acknowledged
that the new policy contains a caveat that ?All
infants should be managed individually so that
insufficient growth or other adverse outcomes
are not ignored and appropriate interventions are
provided?; however, this is somewhat at odds
with the main focus of the new recommenda-
tions and is unlikely to provide a consistent
message to mothers, health professionals and
the public

OP, I'd carry on speaking to health professionals and making your own decisions based on the facts you learn and reading your baby. The WHO have guidelines and recommendations, they are not laws and they are global. Babies in Britain are very different to babies in third world countries.

WHO also recommends breastfeeding for 2 years, something very few mums in the uk do, I don't see them being berated!

It's the World Health Organisation, not the Only-Developing-Countries-with-their-filthy-water-and-unhygienic-lives Health Organisation. It's patronising in the extreme to suggest otherwise.

The following organizations recommend that all babies be exclusively breastfed (no cereal, juice or any other foods) for the first 6 months of life (not the first 4-6 months):

World Health Organization
UNICEF
US Department of Health & Human Services
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Academy of Family Physicians
American Dietetic Association
Australian National Health and Medical Research Council
Royal Australian College of General Practitioners
Health Canada

Most babies will become developmentally and physiologically ready to eat solids by 6-9 months of age. For some babies, delaying solids longer than six months can be a good thing; for example, some doctors may recommend delaying solids for 12 months if there is a family history of allergies.

See I can copy and paste too!

That's a LOT of organisations getting it wrong do you not think? Where did you take your quote from? I'd quite like to read it.

I agree that not ALL babies are ready for solids at 6mths. Some are ready later.

Good news about the reflux btw.

my dd was very much a 'grazer' when it came to milk, so when people would talk about babies drinking 7oz at a time i could never understand it. we used to make up 5 oz at a time (like you, when we needed it) and we threw away a lot of it.

tbh i'd really persevere with the demand feeding for the next good while... Baby Led Weaning research theorises that the baby is ready to eat then he can stick out his hand and eat it, so you could stick with the demand feeding for absolutely as long as you can and then see how the baby feels about a bit of broccoli. if he can eat it, so the thinking goes, that likely indicate that his gut is ready for it, which may well be before 6 months. (although it might also be well after 6 months).

and without wishing to disrespect your GP, i find it very, very hard to believe that he really does know his stuff. if he did, he'd have told you that the WHO guideline is 6 months and you should make every effort possible not to deviate from it. 15 weeks, mish, it's really, really early...

I weaned my ds at 26 weeks, but are you guys all saying that if i did it at 25 weeks it would be damaging to his digestive system and he would have problems later on in life? I think some of you lot are a bit to strict and rigid in your outlook to weaning. I agree that we should stick to 6 months but im sure a few weeks earlier will not be as detrimental as some of you make out.
And its true WHO recommend breastfeeding for 2 years but hardly anyone sticks to that!
I think you should just relax mish, try to put off weaning a lot longer, 3-7 oz isnt too bad anyway, hardly any babes that age actually drink 7oz. 7oz is just a guideline as is weaning at 6 months-its not the law!

SM - i think you are being deliberately obtuse. No-one is "making out" anything. The facts are that a vast amount of research has been done and peer-reviewed, and this is the advice as a result of that research.

I like to know where you get the impression that hardly anyone b/feeds to 2 years.

Just so everyone knows, bigbird 2003 is quoting from a report by the IDFA - the Infant and Dietetic Foods Association. The full report is here .

It's an association of companies who make baby food.

Whether you believe people with a commercial interest in us buying jarred food over an actula health organisation with no financial agenda is up to you.

sorry, bad link
here

BUt they are still guidelines....i firmly believe that all babies are different and some may need early weaning for lots of different reasons.

Ok i dont have stats for the bf thing, but if anyone does then please let me know how many people bf for 2 years...anyway that is for another thread, all im trying to say is the OP doesnt need to be shot at dawn for this-she obviously is struggling with the whole milk and solids thing so having a go at her probably wont help.
Oh and im not being deliberately obtuse, i just think everything is not always black and white...

No, it isnt black and white. Hence guidelines.

I b/feed my ds still at 22 months. I know of many others on here that are still b/feeding beyond 2 years. Some that would have, had their child not self-weaned.

Will google the stats, because I believe there has been some data published on this.

only 13% carry on breastfeeding beyond 6-9 months, can't find statistics for anything older

Nice to see that guideline being adherred to so rigidly

Just read some BLW guidlines too, if a child can hold food and purposefully put it to mouth and eat, can sit up unaided and shows interest in food then they are more than likely ready to be weaned.....so my 4 month old that did and could do those things ( and say yum and walked at 7 months) WAS ready to have solids (she was 3 weeks late hence her development was advanced)

How can 6 months be so rigid.....babies are all so very different

Well, I think the fundamental difference here is - you can see your DD and getting up and cruising. So you can see she is ready to walk at 7 months.

With weaning - you cant see inside to detect gut maturity.