It's not rocket science - "it may cause harm to wean early, it does no harm to leave it till 6m" - WHY do people still want to shovel baby rice in at 12 weeks (or earlier)?

[hunkermunker]

I have come up with some ideas as to why people wean early:

they have competitive baby syndrome and are annoyed someone else's baby rolled first, so they want to get theirs onto steak and chips via baby rice and one fruit or veg a week for months

Well, an idea. Any more?

Oh you can't. So stop being so rude.

Crikey, Cam, how on earth is VVV meant to know what you've read?! Are you drunk?

Show me it, and I'll prove it.

I cant actually prove you have read anything at all, so you show me it, and I'll tell you

Im not being aggressive. Im being direct. Not up for waffling at this time of night.

But early weaning is absolutely NO guarantee of 'curing' an overwrought exhausted mum - is it? Everyone who has baby is absolutely bone tired most of the time, it's the LAW. But even that wouldn't make me consider weaning my dc before it was safe to do so - just doesn't compare

Its difficult not to be, when people are being purposefully obtuse.

Hunker is not as polite as me.

VVV, I said "crikey" not "for the fucking love of all that is cunting holy - I'm trying here!

VVV, guess you can delegate the puree making and feeding.

(I've not known it to happen, mind you.)

What are you talking about. I am not saying that weaned babies sleep better - I am saying that I would like to know the risk to the baby of weaning so that I could decide whether it outweighed the risks of not weaning.If the mother is on edge because she feels that she is doing the wrong thing then it follows that that might pose a risk to the baby.

zookeeper, where is vvv being patronising? i think you know that you are wrong and so you are lashing out. no-one's saying anything particularly controversial here, just 'why would people risk harming their babies if they don't have to?'

I cant prove you have read anything at all, particularly this thread.

Indications are, you havent read much at all.

No I'm stone cold sober. I just find it ridiculous that someone tells me what I've read is not recent when they can't possibly know.

totally with aitch, vvv & hunker on this one

(Cam are you the Cam from sussex sorry for hijack)

I have it on good authority that John Lennon has divorced Cynthia.

Hot news!

Maybe Cam because the recent research says 6 months.

...round and round and round in circles, here we go....

So, what benefit is weaning to an overwraught tired mother then zookeeper?

but what are the risks of not weaning till six months?
none, none whatsoever.
in fact ime, babies who are weaned can start to sleep less well, digestion gets disturbed etc etc

och that's so not what she was saying, CAM. you're being ridiculous now. if it's dept of health weaning or WHO material it should be saying 6 months, so she was opining that it may not be the most recent material.

I have simply asked what are the statistics of a child weaned before 6 months getting Chrohns? Does anyone know?

Cam - I have deja vu

And where is the research that backs it up?

Or have you been reading what CAM has been reading?

"It's not rocket science - "it may cause harm to wean early, it does no harm to leave it till 6m" - WHY do people still want to shovel baby rice in at 12 weeks"

lest we forget what the thread's about...