weaning research

[bigbird2003]

I am currently writing a thesis and am interested in weaning techniques

Please could someone send me a link about the gut problems for babies weaned under 6 months.

I can't find annything relating to it anywhere. I have found 1 article that recommends gluten free before 6 months. HAve also found others that discounts the previous theories on allergy increases.

I'm very interested to where this came from as WHO and UNICEF don't mention it either, they just say it doesn't harm to wean after 6 months , it doesn't say it does harm to wean early.

Also a link about the food is fun before one, as again, I can't find where the research is. All I can find is a baby needs a varied diet from 6 months as breastmilk may not be high enough in iron and some nutrients

IMO the recommendations are to keep babies breastfed for longer (good thing). Does anyone have statistics of last few years, comparing babies weaned at 6 months to those weaned earlier? Whether allergy or gut problems have increased for example

Update; have been directed to kellymom to see some research and again all I can find is a few papers, with very small study groups regarding under 15 weeks or it directs you back to a different kellymom page. I can find no research regarding the gut (I have spent weeks on this and mumsnet has thrown up issues that no where else has)

I really would like to see the research that many on here keep referencing as I'd like my thesis to be totally current

this might be interesting, bigbird. seems to support the 'why bother before six months' approach.

Effects of age of introduction of complementary foods on infant breast milk intake, total energy intake, and growth: a randomised intervention study in Honduras

R. J. Cohen MSa, K. H. Brown MD, Profa, K. G. Dewey PhDa, Corresponding Author Contact Information, J. Canahuati MPhilb and L. Landa Rivera MDb

a Department of Nutrition and the Program In International Nutrition, University of California, Davis CA, U.S.A.
b La Leche League/Honduras, San Pedro Sula, Honduras

Available online 7 October 2003.

Abstract

Summary

In developing countries, the age at which breastfed infants are first given complementary foods is of public health importance because of the risk of diarrhoeal disease from contaminated weaningnext term foods, and the potential risk of growth faltering if foods are inappropriately delayed.

To evaluate whether there are any advantage of complementary feeding prior to 6 months, low-income primiparous mothers who had exclusively breastfed for 4 months were randomly assigned to one of 3 groups: continued exclusive breastfeeding to 6 months (EBF) (n=50); introduction of complementary foods at 4 months with ad libitum nursing from 4-6 months (SF) (n=47); and introduction of complementary foods at 4 months, with maintenance of baseline nursing frequency from 4-6 months (SF-M) (n = 44). previous termBabynext term foods in jars were provided to the SF and SF-M groups from 4 to 6 months. Subjects were visited weekly and provided with lactation guidance; at 4, 5, and 6 months measurements were made of infant intake and breast milk composition. At 4 months, breast milk intake averaged 797 (139) g per day (no difference among groups). Between 4 and 6 months, breast milk intake was unchanged in EBF infants (+6) but decreased in the SF (-103), and SF-M (-62) groups (p

I do have some sympathy with that view kks because I did the same. DS was being sick all the time and the doctor felt that a little bit of solid food would help, which it did thank god. Waiting until 6 months is very very good advice, but I also think it valid to stress to anyone who isn't going to wait until 6 months that they must do it very very cautiously.

but i think that kks was insinuating that because the guideline changes all the time, we should feel free to ignore it, which i think is not good advice at all.

I was just responding to her post on this thread though, not the other one. I'd be a hypocrite to disagree because I ended up doing the same.

I'm reading the HIV-6 months exclusive bf study at the mo - there are some really interesting points there, relevant to all of us - shall I add on to here or make a new thread do you think?

i think it's best to keep things on one place, maybe. ooooh, hurry up and tell, i'm allfrustrated from just reading abstracts.

Will do - but don't get tooooooo excited - have no childcare this morning and am frantically multitasking!

I think it's worth the wait though....

oh, righto twinkle, i was getting posts mixed up. and it does not make you any sort of a hypocrite that under the circumstances you were dealt you went for weaning at 5 months, you lovely woman. it's risk management at the end of the day, so if your son was ill then you just have to weigh that up and press on.

Just to pick up on aintnomountain...

I don't think that the WHO guidelines are just for developing countries, they apply for all countries.

Can't remember who asked but I am coming at this from ed psych point of view, long and convoluted how I got to the weaning subject but is interesting from the baby development point of view and the psych of parents and babies

From a personal perspective, I am defo leaning to the no harm in waiting point of view

From the developmental side I do believe all chidren develop differently and maybe 2 weeks doesn't make much difference (but not 6 weeks iyswim)

From the thesis point of view, it is is very interesting how parents interpret guidelines and how word of mouth is important and where the medical profession are on this subject

So again thank you everyone that has contributed

Yes, the WHO guidlines are for everybody, though obviously it's triply important to wait in developing countries due to lack of affordable good food and water etc

In developed countries the guidlines still apply as waiting til 6 months does no harm whatsoever

Babies in this country often weaned onto wotsits, chocolate pud and skips though, sadly.

i started weaning very slowly at 5 months because it was right for my baby. My baby had never been ill and as she only has a bit of veg once a day i wouldn't say that was egnoring the guidelines totally. I think you have to do what is best for your baby as every baby is different and the 6 months thing is a guideline only based on statistics.

Couldn't you turn it around and ask why babies are weaned 'early'. Given that weaning before 6 months involves alot of boiling and mushing up food, and babies can't sit up in a comfortable position to eat by themselves, why wean them before 6 months?

Most of the traditional 'signs' - wanting to put things in mouth, being interested in food, can be linked to normal play for a 4-5 month old. The big thing that often prompts people to start on solids is a baby starting to want an extra milk feed in the night. Maybe the baby wants another milk feed because it wants another milk feed - not solids.

I don't understand why you'd bother, KKS. I honestly don't mean to be rude, but if it was a tiny bit of vegetable puree once a day to start with, what was the point?

Re: Food for fun before they're 1, isn't that partly common sense? Given the amount that an under 1 year old actually eats, and the fact that they are still (if following recommendations) having breast milk or formula, and the amount of practice that is involved in getting food into mouth rather than on clothes, kitchen ceiling etc., I think we would be in big trouble if you really had to be stuffing your baby's face with food for them to be healthy.

Its just tasters really, to get her used to eating from a spoon etc. I am not being ignorant to the guidelines set as i was very good when i was pregnant. I didn't smoke,drink alcohol,eat pate or anything i was told could harm the baby. And i think by me doing that i have a very healthy,beautifal little girl. She's always been a good weight (on the average line in her red book) and she has never had an illness yet so i think the guidelines for pregnacy is very good. I think i would be harming her more if i smoked around her (i am not a smoker,i just mean if i did). I didn't even eat peanuts cause i was told if you do then your baby can get exma (i can't spell that) if you have exma yourself, which i do.

Bigbird I agree with your comment on babies developing differently and does it really make much difference if you wean at 24 weeks instead of 26. How does anyone actually now that at 6 months on the dot your babies gut is ready? I suppose you are just saying that this is the minimum start time. If a baby is formula fed however surely they no longer have a 'virgin gut' and therefore it is different for them? I am not sure if this is the place to ask this but well I might as well go ahead now anyway . Those of you that have weaned at 6 months did you start very slowly i.e. like Annabel Karmel but from 6 months instead of 4 OR did you introduce foods quicker.

BTW meant to say that my baby is bf and I know that many of you are BLWs and don't particularly like AK but that is what I used last time!

Wanted to add that I waited until over 6 months with ds1 and he was a big, hungry boy. He weighed 18 pounds and 14 ozs at 16 weeks and was just fine on breastmilk. Milk has more calories anyway so if baby is very hungry then more milk will help not tiny quantities of food.

Would it make a difference if your baby was early or late. Mine was 2 weeks late and was a very healthy 7ib 9oz.

More milk didn't help my baby, he was losing weight. (formula may have done, although I didn't want to go down that route) Milk is certainly more calorific than frut/veggies and baby rice. Not though a balanced diet of protein, fat, dairy & carbs - My ds went straight onto that at 6 mths and his weight stabilised. Not all babies are the same.

Also, wanted to add that not all under one's eat tiny amounts. My 8 mth old eats more than his toddler sister. He also wakes in the night for breastfeeds. He is only on the 9th centile, but a very hungry baby

Just to add apparently, you can tell when someone was weaned by looking at their bones. There is a deserted village called wharam percy in North Yorkshire and they examined their bones. The ones that died the youngest were weaned the earliest. There's apparently a lot of study been done. This doesn't connect to your 'gut'research though. I had some information from institute of optimum nutrition - they published a book for babies and toddlers with recommendations.

here