Can we knock this "My child was weaned at X weeks and is perfectly healthy" thing on the head? It's not a good argument.

[welliemum]

I've just been reading about early life influences on adult disease risk - for example, the way birth weight and early growth affect someone's risk of having heart disease decades later.

The experts in this field all seem to agree on one thing: that early nutrition and growth have a significant impact on health in later life. However, because this sort of thing is so hard to study, no-one really knows how it all works, what's good, what's bad, who's the most at risk.

Very frustrating for someone like me who isn't involved in the research but just wants to know what to do with my own children to give them the best start in life.

That's why I enjoy discussing this sort of thing on MN, trying to sort out the clear evidence from the myths. But we can't use our own young children as examples.

I weaned my 2 at a particular age (doesn't matter what). They're now 3 and nearly 2 and very healthy.

So can I congratulate myself because the weaning age I chose was obviously the right one? Absolutely not. I could have got it hideously wrong, and only the next 60 years or so will tell.

We have to take the long view on this sort of thing.

Rant over!

amen to that welliemum!

however, when commercial baby food says suitable from 4 - 6 months and when HVs offer the advice of weaning when babies are too big/ too small/ not fitting the pattern, then we are really struggling

welliemum - completely agree, there is a broad consensus that early nutrition (and care) has a huge impact on later health. We can do our best with the information available but we cannot possibly conclude that we have done the right thing when our children are still toddlers.

Not disagreeing with you welliemum, but when do you think we can sit back and say 'job well done'? When they are at school, teenagers, approaching middle age, in the 60s and potentially developing osteoprosis or Alzheimers? When can you finally say that you did the job OK?. Since early nutrition can affect the whole of your life, not just childhood. Whilst I agree with your general premise I do think that sometimes you can look at markers on the way and say 'that's a good sign' (or a bad one). Otherwise we'd never stop worrying and have a chance to enjoy our children.

You speak sense, Welliemum.

Orm, people don't have to worry about it - they just shouldn't say 'Well, I did x and mine are OK' as if it's evidence of anything at all. No point worrying about something you can't change but no-one shouldn't insist that what they did is right based on a sample of one, two, three, whatever.

well said welliemum!!!!!!!and i think same can be said for every other aspect of parenting too!

Orm, sadly, I don't think we ever can sit back and say "job well done". I think the worry goes on forever, and we just have to find ways of not becoming nervous wrecks over parenting decisions we've made.

My particular way (with health-related stuff) is to do quite a bit of reading on the important questions, so I can at least say that when I made the decision, I made it with the best info available at the time.

Best anyone can do I think. No answers at the back of the book in this game.

Job well done is on a persons death.

Nice post wellie.

I was thinking just this the other day, Wellie.

Fab post.

I loathe the smug, "Well, I weaned at 6 weeks and MY DS is a perfectly healthy 17mo" - you don't want to go "Er, there's a longer view here - any problems might not have shown up yet" to someone who is unlikely to show any outward sign they've listened. They're more likely to get defensive and, possibly, to fret inwardly that they've done some harm.

Same with ffeeding, really - you get posts from people saying they're worried about giving formula for x, y and z reasons personal to them and people tramp onto the thread and go, "My 3yo had formula and she's fine - go ahead, you nutter, this exclusive bf thing is a myth and unattainable anyway and only smug hippies will tell you otherwise" - and again, you can't say "What about the longterm studies into heart disease, diabetes and high blood pressure later in life?" - not without looking unkind.

I can say it on this thread and link to it in future though, I guess. Neat

even worse is "I did sleep training at 5 days and weaned at 12 weeks and now my baby sleeps through the night! well done me"
because of course sleeping through the night is the Ultimate Goal for us all.
I mean who cares about nutrition or future health or brain and emotional developmentas long as the baby sleeps through the night that's the important thing
and anyone who suggests otherwise is of course jealous

Equally then, we must not assume that just because current guidelines say we should wean at 6 months, that this is the best thing for babies either. For all we know, this view will be rejected in favour of later weaning (or earlier weaning [shcok])

All people who say "I weaned mine at 12 weeks and he is now a strapping 12 year old" are saying is that they too followed current guidelines in their day.

yes, but not if they go on to say
so the current guidelines are a load of old crap
which they do

No, that's not all they're saying, DG - they're doing as HC says (although I would imagine some conscience-salving is part of why people post thus as well - as in "If I shout loudly enough, it'll be true").

If the guidelines alter, I'll know I did what I did based on the best evidence of the time - that's all I'm asking anyone to do. And if, in future, my DIL says to me that there's this, that and the other well-researched and excellent reason for weaning earlier, I'll support that (very unlikely - the only reason this has come about is the trend for forcing babies to sleep through (which it doesn't always do) and because there's big money to be made out of spoon-feeding processed food into babies of 4mo - heaven forbid that you wait till 6mo or later and let them eat what their parents are eating).

I think what they mean when they say the guidelines are crap is obviously not that, but that if you did not follow the guidelines, your child would not immediately die, or indeed, so far as we can see, suffer any ill-health.

I can tell you what is equally irritating and that is those who have been parents for a year or two telling off those who have been parents for a lot longer for doing what they thought was the right thing.

I don't see it as telling anyone off, DG - interesting view of "Can we let the OP have the actual researched guidelines and the reasons for this without being sneered at, not just "mine's OK, this lot are twats, chin-out posturing, please?" Thanks".

Hmm..in that case let's close down Mumsnet
and simply listen to the experts, right?

Ah hold on, the 'experts' themselves don't know for sure
because 'it is so hard to study'.
Bit of a bugger that.

Sorry, WM, I am confused - who are we supposed to listen now?

OK, well I admit, I tend to avoid getting into the detailed arguments based on up to date research because I do not have that expertise. I rarely come at any discussion here from any other angle other than the interested amateur!

I am not against anything said here or on other threads on this subject. I just like to remind people that even those who do not study this subject in depth are capable of doing their best and do not like to have their efforts jumped on. Imagine how upsetting it can be to have it assumed that you have done irreparable damage to the health or welfare of your precious children.

come to

The real issue though, is that the current guidelines have not been tested over lifetime either - so actually they are as likely to be wrong as the old ones!

I think therefore a healthy dose of scepticism over any 'guidelines' produced without rigorous evidence is probably the way to go.

You only need to look at the current direction the peanut allergy debate is going in to see just how wrong govt. advice can be!

i agree with dumbledoresgirl. while i accept that the current guidelines sould be adhered to in theory, there are many variables to be taken into account, not just "sleeping through". some children are bigger and (especially if not bf) will need earlier weaning. if i have another dc then i will follow the current guidelines when weaning, but when i had ds i didnt know all the info. the hv's advised me to wean stupidly early. so i did, they're the experts, right?

i would hate to think that i have done ds irreparable harm by early weaning.

COMPLETELY agree with harpsichordcarrier's post of 09:14:15.
(and also agrre with OP)

there's a lot of people out there who do things that are definitely bad for them (tests, studies etc have proven it) and they can say that they are fine. there's always going to be an exception to the rule.

I agree lissielou when I had my sons 20 odd years ago I followed guidelines for weaning and sleep positions that were all wrong!I do worry that I may harmed them in some way that will come to light in later years.

Now I am following different guidelines with DD
but what's to say that in a few years they wont change their minds again and once more fill me with guilt?!

You see, this is exactly the sort of post I object to:

"there's a lot of people out there who do things that are definitely bad for them (tests, studies etc have proven it) and they can say that they are fine. there's always going to be an exception to the rule."

The implication being that people who wean early are in the same category as say smokers or drug takers or people who overeat. Plenty of smokers, drug takers and overweight people live into old age and smugly say that their particular vice did them no harm. They are the exceptions to the rule. But that does not mean that nicotine, other drugs or excessive weight is conducive to good health. We all know that. But lumping mothers who weaned their children early into this category is wrong and hurtful to those of us who take no health risks and have raised their children equally carefully.

isn't the OP trying to say that it's not the guidelines that are the issue but the attitude of the argument that says "This is the way I did so I'm right and you're wrong"?

And that's just good manners (or lack thereof)

Agree Tommy.

All I am saying is that those who wean at 6 months and turn around and say "I am right and you were wrong" to those who weaned earlier are equally bad mannered.

absolutely