Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Weaning

Find weaning advice from other Mumsnetters on our Weaning forum. Use our child development calendar for more information.

Original poster

15 WEEKS OLD AND FOOD!

250 replies

loopyredangel · 13/02/2008 22:54

My almost 15 week old has been showing a keen interest in food for a couple of weeks now, putting hands in his mouth when we are eating, leaning forward when we have food, fussing when he sees us eating. So today I tried him with some baby rice pudding and he couldn't get enough he was pushing the spoon to his mouth, and was excited everytime the spoon was approaching his mouth. He now weighs 15lb and has been breastfed to this point and Iwill carry on breasfeeding, but is it okay to carry on feeding him, he woofed down a full tin of the small Heinz Rice Pudding. I fear the health visitors won't be happy, but DS seemed so relieved, content and a happy little boy after he got his food!

OP posts:
bundle · 14/02/2008 12:21

WHO

"WHO recommends exclusive breastfeeding for six months, and sustained breastfeeding with appropriate complementary foods up to two years or beyond."

AitchTwoOh · 14/02/2008 12:24

minorityrules, it's simply not true about the weaning age returning to 4 months, HV advice has always been vague in this country, i remember someone posted it here, it was a nightmare. very strongly pro 6 months but also mentioned 17 weeks etc, so terribly difficult to get a clear message from.

however to take your point, yes, if 4 months became the guideline because new research showed that it was better then of course attitudes would change. because no one on here is a doctor afaik, so we're obliged pretty much to go along with the guidelines. just like the mums who weaned as 4 months according to the best advice then would now wean at 6 months, i'm sure. and i'm sure that if the guidelines change upwards in future, which seems more likely tbh, then all of us will revise upwards without getting all defensive about when we weaned our kids. i never understand why that's a difficult question, tbh.

Original poster
loopyredangel · 14/02/2008 12:33

With my first DS I never noticed his growth spurts because he fed all the time anyway, was on constantly for months. So yes it does sound like my LO is having a major growth spurt! He is trying to crawl on the floor and is slobbering alot so could be starting to teeth.

OP posts:
Original poster
loopyredangel · 14/02/2008 12:37

LOL, I swear he is trying to grab my chicken sandwich LOL!

OP posts:
bluenosesaint · 14/02/2008 12:44

...and when he grabs it and manages to eat some of it, he is ready to be weaned

AitchTwoOh · 14/02/2008 12:45

but he probably is trying to grab it, and he probably will try to stuff it in his mouth, cos that's what babies do. but this is the bit where you being the adult kicks in, and you do know that at 15 weeks there is definite evidence of kidney damage in under 17 week-old children who are eating solids, so you won't let him. give him a teether instead, then see what happens when he gets a bit older.

minorityrules · 14/02/2008 12:45

My point is, as it isn't an exact science, I don't think people should be as harsh as they are here sometimes. Obviously, educate and advise people so we don't return to the rusk in a bottle at 5 weeks age

The gut thing (afaik) isn't mentioned in the WHO references/research that has come from somewhere else and now lumped in as WHO advice.

I truly believe all babies are different and progress at different rates in all aspects of development and a guideline of 4-6 months (as per WHO) is a good guide, not set in stone

The post yesterday had 2 different people saying they had heard the same thing re 4 months

AitchTwoOh · 14/02/2008 12:49

yes, minority, but what is not in dispute therefore is that 15 weeks is too early...
and i was told by an hv that 4 months was coming back in... guess where she'd read it? a parenting forum. they're as subject to gossip as we are, so best stick by the guidelines until we hear different.

bluenosesaint · 14/02/2008 12:53

I think what confuses people is that HV's and health professionals say that solids should never be given under 17 weeks. Somehow people then interpret that to mean that solids after 17 weeks (4 months) is ok

AitchTwoOh · 14/02/2008 12:58

ah but it kind of is, that's the thing. afai can understand it, there isn't evidence of harm between 4-6 months. the open gut theory, however, to me seems sensible wrt allergies (and plus dd was perfectly fine on milk) so i never needed to push the 6 months thing.
there is also the fact that it is a pita to puree stuff etc when if you wait until they are ready to self-feed then they can get on with it and control their own intake, which may help with the obesity timebomb. interesting programme on radio 4 about it last week, a dietician said 'parents choose the food, kids choose how much they want to eat' and obviously if the parent is just letting them get on with self-feeding it's easier to keep out of that 'have they eaten enough?' panic.

bluenosesaint · 14/02/2008 13:13

"and i was told by an hv that 4 months was coming back in... guess where she'd read it? a parenting forum. they're as subject to gossip as we are, so best stick by the guidelines until we hear different."

But 17 weeks is 4 calander months and so its not "coming back in" it already is in if you translate not before 17 weeks to be 'any time after 17 weeks is ok' ...

AitchTwoOh · 14/02/2008 13:27

true, but we were having an argument discussion about the 6 months guideline at the time.

FioFio · 14/02/2008 13:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

bluenosesaint · 14/02/2008 13:34

My HV advised not to give solids before 17 weeks under any circumstances. My arguement is that this is often interpretted as any time after 17 weeks is ok ...

She also told me that there was no way i would get my very big baby to 6 months without weaning - she was right about that, dd was 25 weeks

AitchTwoOh · 14/02/2008 13:36

mine said it was 6 months (but 4 months really wink wink hem hem). you know, 'it's 6 months but if they seem unsatisfied just follow your instincts and crack open the baby rice, anyway the guideline is coming back to 4 months as it is'. thing is, as a first-time mum i was very low on instincts so i'm glad i rode out that growth spurt and kept dd on milk until 6 mos. (as much for laziness as anything else).

Bekkie32 · 14/02/2008 13:47

I would wait until the 16 week mark - just so you fall into the 4 - 6 months range.

If baby has appetitie for both, go for it, after the 4th month birthday.

I only wish my baby had a huge appetite. I am envious of all those parents who babies whoof down jars of food and those huge servings of baby rice, which would even fill me up!

seeker · 14/02/2008 14:10

WHY? WHY? WHY? Will somebody please tell me WHY!!!!!!!!!

bluenosesaint · 14/02/2008 14:12

Aitch - i totally agree on the 'laziness' thing ...its soooooooooo much easier to wait isn't it?

I wish i'd have waited with my other dd's (guidelines were 4 months at the time, although dd2 was 5 months by the time she was anywhere near ready) it is so much easier and dd3 will tolerate so much more already! (i thought dd1 was gonna be on purees forever ...)

Lulumama · 14/02/2008 14:16

why bekkie? a baby has their entire life ahead of them to eat? why should they need to eat a whole jar of food at 4 monhts old... it takes 9 months to grow a baby in utero, why the rush to get them onto food so quickly??

the 6 month guideline is not made up arbitarily

there are reasons behind it

Bekkie32 · 14/02/2008 15:27

Lulumama - I meant in reference to MY baby (who is actually older - 6 months and still cannot finish a jar). I was pressured into starting early at around 4 -5 months and still 6 - 7 weeks on, she still shows no interest. 1 glass a day if we are lucky.

Bekkie32 · 14/02/2008 15:36

Bluenosesaint - ithere is something true to what you say.

Here is something similar that pees me off:

On jars of baby food over here they put "Nach dem 4 monate ". Which translates as "after the 4th month".

On the jars of food for 6 month old babies, or 8 month old babies, they put "ab dem 6 monate", which translates as "from 6 months".

To me, from 6 months means when the baby is 6 months old you can feed this food.

But how would you interpret after the fourth month. For instance up until your baby is five months, if someone asks you "how old is your baby, you normally say 4 months". So to me after 4 months would mean when the baby is 5 months. If that is the case why dont they just put "ab 5 monate/from 5 months"? on the jars. If someone else interprets after 4 months as when they ARE 4 months then why dont they put "ab 4 monate/from 4 months" on instead. It seems it is like some kind of "get out clause, which is deliberately open to interpretation".

ruddynorah · 14/02/2008 15:40

i wouldn't go by anything on any can, packet or jar of baby food.

Bekkie32 · 14/02/2008 15:48

I also forgot to say:

If I could turn back time, I would never have started my baby on solids so early as 4 months. (But I had pressure MIL and )- next time I would stand my ground. I am just hoping and praying she never develops any allergies. I fed her what was "deemed as okay", but made a mistake on gluten for quite some time.

I am cutting myself up, wondering what damage I may have done. Especially if you read what is behind the 6 month rule.

Bekkie32 · 14/02/2008 15:49

Mil and Doc - was supposed to say in above post

Lulumama · 14/02/2008 15:52

i commented on that lower down, bekki, that if the jar says from 4 months, then you get an extra two months of buying from the parents, than if you say from 6 months..... i complained to a well known maker of baby foods about their labelling and got a very fuzzy response.....

i would not worry too much about your little one not eating as much as other babies... food is for fun until you are one ! it is about different tastes and textures and milk is still the main source of nutrition for the first year, food is a compliment, not a replacement for food for a while