'Big' babies and early weaning

[Haylstones]

Can anyone set me straight on this please? Ds is a 'big' baby at 17lb 9oz at 10 weeks and I was told today by the HV that I would probably have to wean him early because he is so big. I'm exc bfing with no problems, he's sleeping well and I was planning on waiting until 6 months (or as close as poss to then) to wean him.
Lots of people have said the same as this but my understanding was that babies weren't ready developmentally until 6 months so surely his size doesn't make him ready earlier than other babies?
Ds actually feeds less than dd did and she was pretty small... if he needs more calories am I not better giving him more milk if he starts getting hungrier before 6 months?
Some sane advice would be much appreciated if anyone can make sense of my rambling

Your HV is talking rubbish. FWIW they say the same thing about small babies, so there is absolutely no logic to it - the odd teaspoon of food you'll get down your lo at 17 wks contains fewer calories than milk, so it's not going to fill him up more.

Yep, your HV is talking out of her arse.

Milk will fill him up if he is hungry.

my babies were big at birth and stayed big while babies. DC3 is about 27lbs at 8.5mo.

no issue: weaned at 6mo. Milk has more calories than most other things you can give your baby anyway. ignore her...

Thanks, thought so but wanted to check!
It's amazing how many people say that to me though (after ALWAYS commenting on his size- somebody I barely knew called him a beefy boy last week fgs- I feel really protective as he's still my baby no matter how big/small he is !)

I guess this is proof of what i always expected re HVs not being the baby experts (although I'm sure some are...)

well, they say wean them because they're big
but they also say wean them because they're not gaining weight don't they - no rhyme nor reason to the whole thing

it's all bollocks.
I don't know why people are so keen to shovel goo into babies, I really don't. Ignore the big baby stuff - I had a whopper for a DD and jsut became immune in the end

Ditto on everyone else, I can't add anymore, just wanted to add my vote!

Yeah tis twaddle. DD was always off the charts for weight. Exclusively bf for 7 months until she was developmentally ready for something else.

Can't understand why we can't have a positive spin on big babies and weaning. Out with the 'ooh you'll have to wean early' and in with the ' what a brillig job your milk is doing, long may it continue'.

That would be a fab idea SOH. Most people are surprised when I say I'm still bfing ds because he's so big and I get 'oh you are doing well, no wonder you're losing the weight blah blah)It's actually sooooo easy

My dd was big as well, but luckily nobody was stupid enough to try this line on me! Your milk is obvioulsy doing a fab job, so why change when he doesn't need anything else? I bf exclusively up to 6 months, dd slept well and put on weight like she had been blown up with bicycle pump. I did have a few comments about me obviously producing Jersey Gold Top

Yes, it's twaddle! I exc bf ds, who's on the 98th centile, for 6 months, despite the odd comment from others about how he was bound to need more than breastmilk. Er, how do you think he got this big in the first place?

it is weird logic imo. do bigger babies reach all their developmental milestones faster? will they walk early, talk early etc? i'd be genuinely interested to know what the HV says to that.

Brill advice as usual. I shall carry on as I intended!