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, for goodness sake. How many babies have stomas from weaning at 4 months? Honestly, amongst the MN posters, most of whom were probably given solids long before 6 months, how many have had stomas since 12 months? Not me nor any of my friends. How many of our children? Not mine nor any of my friends'. Anecdotal, I know, but really...

Of course if the guidelines now say don't do it, don't. But let's not get it out of perspective. There are millions of healthy children and adults who miraculously survived early weaning.

A thread title like this could irritate those of us who acted in good faith on advice given to us.

zookeeper, that research could never take place. it would be unethical to subject babies to potential risk because weaning early does carry a very well established risk to babies.

righto, zookeepwhatever, consider yourself judged. i think you're daft.

It wouldnt have to take place harpsi, CAM would just have to (pretend) to read it, or not, as the case may be.

et VOILA! point proven

Enough, don't you think?

In my experience the stick works the other way, anyway. Pressure to wean, giving the tot solids is sonething to brag about (like sitting up, sleeping through, one of those things).

"Oh look at her, NoBiggy, she's ready!"
(Cue NoBiggy feeling like a mean old shit who can't even tell that dd fancies a sandwich)

Hunker munker, I think your last comment was really quite sick. Shame on you.

yes but there are lots of consequences short of stomas.
like food allergies/intolerances.
like childhood obesity.
like eczema/asthma.
and yeah there are plenty more children with those conditions than 20 or 30 years ago

singersgirl.....its says NOW and the FUTURE several imes through this thread and NOT the past, because adverse advice was given (still is frequently) before now

hunker, i will be right behind you with another spoon

Message withdrawn

singersgirl, the bit about the stomas is completely anecdotal, from me. please see the aforesaid anecdote further down. it certainly shook me, and would likely have made the difference between weaning early or weaning at 6 months had i been swithering.

can't be arsed

let's finish on this

Why sick? You're asking for research - see why there might not be masses now?

that is true nobiggy and danae, i was under MUCH more pressure to wean before 6 months than after.

Have I asked for research? Why do you persist in misreading everything 'i say? FFS!!!! do you thi nk that last nwas fair?

still can't be arsed

zookeeper, I think hunker was trying to make the same point as me, but as you weren't listening, I think she was trying to get your attention

didn't you ask for reserach about 7 times? did i imagine that?

By zookeeper on Sun 08-Apr-07 00:11:41
could someone please tell me the statistical risk of a child weaned before 6 months developing Chrohns?

How would one do that without er...research?

she did, several times, annoyingly so

"could someone please tell me the statistical risk of a child weaned before 6 months developing Chrohns?"

zookeeper HOW would you answer that question without research?