F*cking Heinz

[hunkermunker]

Just that really

Am I the only person who doesn't think that Laugs is saying that only unintelligent, uneducated women will not wean at the same time as she did?

When I read her post, it seemed very clear to me that she was making it clear that her decision, and that of her friends, to wean when they did was based on intelligent consideration - ie she didn't want to open herself up to the charge of being unintelligent and just following the advertisers'/manufacturers' advice.

HauntedHousemate - I did use jars because sometimes it honestly was easier to open a jar than peel a carrot, cook it, mash it, wash up all the utensils - all with two other little children needing my time and attention too. I didn't want my babies to live on convenience foods, but I used them when I needed a break or had another priority, especially when whatever I was cooking for the other children, my dh and I wouldn't be suitable for the baby.

It's not about a person's level of formal education, it's about whether you have educated yourself on this particular topic. I believe there is a very big difference between making an informed decision to wean early and an uninformed decision to wean early. I knew the guidance was to wait 6 months and the reasons behind that, and informed myself of the many possible signs of readiness. I started with the intention of waiting to 26 weeks but ended up weaning at 22 weeks as I had became aware over a period of weeks that my DS was probably ready. He took to feeding himself and eating without a problem straight away.

Compare this to my friend who weaned her DS at 16 weeks "because milk wasn't enough for him as he's a big boy".

We both went to the same university, same class of degree, same type of job etc. It clearly isn't about education but it is about being educated or educating yourself about not weaning early. So many of the people who wean early do so from an uninformed, uneducated position. They are not interested in / don't have the time to do 'independent' reading and research so they will get their advice from their parents (who were in a wean early culture), from a HV (many of whom advocate weaning at 4 months and don't have the time or the inclination to explain why we should wait) or from the jars they see in the supermarkets which 4 months plus on the front and then have some smallprint gobbledegook on the back about how it is better to wait until 6 months.

So people take this advice as meaning it is probably okay to wean even earlier than 4 months if they have a big baby / baby waking up at night / baby needing feeds more than every 4 hours etc.

If jars said 6 months + rather than 4 months +, then people would still wean early because they have a big baby / wakeful baby / frequent feeding baby but perhaps many of them would wait until 4 or 5 months rather than the heartbreakingly early 2 or 3 months now.

Hi, I haven't been hiding (honest) but have come back to see that my 'educated' comment has obviously wound some of you up. Thanks sunnygirl, for seeing where I'm coming from!

I really wasn't trying to be rude. What I was trying to say - perhaps badly - was that I am not the kind of person who reads '4 months' on a jar and then decides to wean my baby. I considered it for a long time. I read widely (though only parenting manuals, not scientific reports). I did everything else 'by the book' and was an anxious to get it right first time mum, not someone who assumes they know best.

I agree that I probably took the HV's advice because she told me what I wanted to hear, but to me it had got to the point of opting to supplement her diet with formula or to supplement it with a bit of pureed pear. I chose the pear as I felt that was the healthier option.

I'm not saying it's big and clever to wean early. I felt embarrassed when I did it. But it honestly did turn out that everyone else I knew did the same. (independently of one another)

Tommee Tipee stuff also says that "from 4mths on milk isn't enough" or words to that effect, it's on all their weaning spoons, bowls etc.

Heinz eventually emailed me back to say "flexible approach to weaning ... blah blah ... contaminated water ... blah ... EU law supports this by allowing labelling to say "from 4 months" blah blah blah.

I have replied to the charming Baby Careline Adviser who was left the job of replying to me and asked for clairifcation, given that in spite of the DOH's advice that "If your baby seems hungrier at
any time before six months, they may be having a growth
spurt, and extra breast or formula milk will be enough to
meet their needs.", Heinz disagree, and instead advise that "Somewhere between 4 and 6 months, babies may start to show an interest in your food. They may be less satisfied with milk, demanding more feeds or waking up hungry instead of sleeping through. These signs may mean they are ready for weaning". Which to me seems like a direct contradiction.

It is really shitty that they can get away with this sort of thing though. The guy at Trading Standards said that these big companies often headhunt ex-Trading Standards employees to ensure they can get away with whatever corruptness they're busy with.