No later than 26 weeks...

[Letsgetreadytorumbleagain]

My DC2 is 22 weeks old and has been showing signs of being ready for food, I was convinced I would wait until 6 months like I did with DC1 (even though I know the signs were there a good few weeks before then!) but I have been doing some reading about 'complementary feeding'

I find it interesting that everyone states that babies should be ebf for 6 months and not to wean until then BUT most of the papers I'm coming across say not before 17 weeks but no later than 26 weeks. Also there seems to be some research that suggests BF babies should start complementary feeding earlier than FF babies but that it would be too complicated to give different guidelines...

No wonder people get so confused

I agree it is confusing, there is so much different information out there. Thank goodness for mumsnet!

I waited til 6 months in the end and going ok so far.

Personally I felt there was no rush, baby wasn't starving on my milk as milk is all they need until 6 months. She's 6 and a half months now and is more interested in milk than food currently.

That's how I felt @HT85, just found it odd that the research papers I've been reading were stating NO Later than 26 weeks, whereas the guidance was very much wait until 6 month - doesn't seem to tally

The research isn't totally clear cut, so official guidance has to make a judgement. Also it might be slightly different based on breast or formula feeding for example there's evidence it is better to introduce potential allergens including gluten while the baby is still breastfeeding - if they already have formula it won't matter so much.

Also the vast majority of babies are weaned before 26 weeks, but the "around 6 months" guidance has made it much more likely that parents will wait until at least 17 weeks. So I imagine there is an analysis that says the benefit of most parents waiting til 17 weeks is greater than any potential risk from some parents waiting too long after 6 months.