14 Weeks old... Weaning too soon?

[xxClaire_24xx]

I think most people who wean before 6 months, whether on the doctor's advice or not, don't give any wheat/gluten products before 6 months. At least I know I didn't, nor did anyone else I know personally who has weaned early. Also, I'm not saying that early weaning didn't cause your celiac's disease, but the one person I know with it wasn't weaned until 5.5 months, and had no wheat until 8 months (I know this because I had him ask his mother when I was starting weaning).

we started purely on baby rice as the paeds said it was just thick milk basically then it was either pureed veg of a little of Ellas kitchen organic pouches even now I have added wheat or gluten its till mostly mashed veg and fruit xx

 

[Natsku]

I think most people who wean before 6 months, whether on the doctor's advice or not, don't give any wheat/gluten products before 6 months. At least I know I didn't, nor did anyone else I know personally who has weaned early. Also, I'm not saying that early weaning didn't cause your celiac's disease, but the one person I know with it wasn't weaned until 5.5 months, and had no wheat until 8 months (I know this because I had him ask his mother when I was starting weaning).

That is true but the other digestive issues don't require gluten (unless I'm wrong, am I?). I don't know if I was given gluten before 6 months, not sure what the guidelines were then.

 

[Murray]

I have carried on weaning my son as he is enjoying the baby rice, I think PERSONALLY everyone has there own reason, and I know for a fact he will not last till 6 months. Also there is no rush, no wanting to force my son into something he doesnt want to do. But purely I dont want my son to feel starving or ill and the fact HE is wanting to be wean not out of my own selfish needs.... Sorry ladies but some of you are coming across this way.

I am also weaning at 12 weeks old! Disgraceful of me I know :/

I chose to do this for two reasons... 1. Reflux and 2. Very hungry baby!

Gracie is still draining 8oz bottles of hungry baby every 3-4hrs with porridge morning and night.

People have there own views and opinions on weaning...forget about them and do what you want and feel is right. It is your baby and mam knows best!


What is your routine? x

 

[NuKe]

 

[taylor197878]

i started brooke at 17 weeks and that was early but on advice from hv

14 weeks is far to early for ur baby all the baby needs now is milk.

17 weeks is the earlist u should wean.

 

[c.m.c]

I have carried on weaning my son as he is enjoying the baby rice, I think PERSONALLY everyone has there own reason, and I know for a fact he will not last till 6 months. Also there is no rush, no wanting to force my son into something he doesnt want to do. But purely I dont want my son to feel starving or ill and the fact HE is wanting to be wean not out of my own selfish needs.... Sorry ladies but some of you are coming across this way.

I am also weaning at 12 weeks old! Disgraceful of me I know :/

I chose to do this for two reasons... 1. Reflux and 2. Very hungry baby!

Gracie is still draining 8oz bottles of hungry baby every 3-4hrs with porridge morning and night.

People have there own views and opinions on weaning...forget about them and do what you want and feel is right. It is your baby and mam knows best!


What is your routine? x

8oz bottles every 3 hours is normal enough- my LO was taking 8-10oz 6 times a day at 10 weeks and i just kept giving her milk- people couldnt believe how much she was drinking

 

[tu123]

We weaned at 4.5mths because of reflux. LO did very well but i cant help but think if the reflux would have got better by itself anyway, as her gut matured?

I dont see the point about weaning "because baby is hungry". they dont go straight onto 3 filling meals a day! We have only just got onto 3 meals a day after 2.5mths of weaning and she still needs approx 750ml a day so i end up feeding her nearly every 2-3hrs anyway.

 

[c.m.c]

We weaned at 4.5mths because of reflux. LO did very well but i cant help but think if the reflux would have got better by itself anyway, as her gut matured?

I dont see the point about weaning "because baby is hungry". they dont go straight onto 3 filling meals a day! We have only just got onto 3 meals a day after 2.5mths of weaning and she still needs approx 750ml a day so i end up feeding her nearly every 2-3hrs anyway.

i agree- the wee hungry spells soon settle down

 

[Miss_Bump]

I have carried on weaning my son as he is enjoying the baby rice, I think PERSONALLY everyone has there own reason, and I know for a fact he will not last till 6 months. Also there is no rush, no wanting to force my son into something he doesnt want to do. But purely I dont want my son to feel starving or ill and the fact HE is wanting to be wean not out of my own selfish needs.... Sorry ladies but some of you are coming across this way.

I am also weaning at 12 weeks old! Disgraceful of me I know :/

I chose to do this for two reasons... 1. Reflux and 2. Very hungry baby!

Gracie is still draining 8oz bottles of hungry baby every 3-4hrs with porridge morning and night. People have there own views and opinions on weaning...forget about them and do what you want and feel is right. It is your baby and mam knows best!


What is your routine? x

Its perfectly normal for a 12 week old to be having that much milk, there is a huge growth spurt at this age

 

[Puddingpea11]

For me i think i find it hard to trust the guidelines because they are forever changing. In pregnancy it was a case of the guidelines changing over shell fish and peanuts and how it was now suggested that it was ok to eat them. In fact they flat out said that they didnt know what eating peanuts may or may not do to your child etc.

I think that a weaning age is different for every child. If your child is obviously looking for something other than milk, supporting their own head, very active, able to sit, is able to swallow.... then there is no harm in just trying. You will soon learn if the baby is not ready, as if they cant swallow the food, they will push it out wioth their tongue, and if they do eat it and end up with a poorly tummy or runs, then its obviously to soon. Even at 6 months the baby may not be ready and therefore even tryin within the guidelines is causing an upset-so again no harm in giving it a try.

I was given baby rice at 17 weeks, and so was my brother. My brother is only 6, so its not like my parents are the older generation. My mum just went with what we wanted. We do not have any allergies or stomach problems. I know thats not to say that my daughter will or wont have pronblems...but i will still be trying with some baby rice at 17 weeks. If she doesnt want it, or it doesnt agree with her then i will hold off a bit longer. Currently she feeds every 2 hours...sometimes at night too. After some feeds she looks for more, but cant fit anymore in her tummy so it soon comes up. So its my opinion that the milk is not rich enough for her. I still have another 3-4 weeks before i will consider weaning (17-18 weeks), and will be talking to my hv about my opinion tomorrow.

These are all guidelines they are not written rules. Health organisations have proven to be wrong time after time..hence the ever changing guidelines, the articles in newspapaers that are forever contradicting themselves "salt will give you a heart attack...a week later....scientist discover salt does not contribute to heart attacks" etc. Plus every country is different with their guidlines too. My friends are from France and they looked in my nhs book and were telling me how they are told completley different things.

I dont think anyone here is right or wrong. We are all welcome to our own opinions, and we are all raising our children differently....and most importantly we are all doing what we think is best for our child. As long as you discuss your weaning plan with your hv and getting some professional opinions, then go for it.

I personally wouldnt wean my child at 14 weeks, unless advised to by my doctor.

 

[xxClaire_24xx]

what I dont understand is what if a baby is 2 weeks overdue does that mean they can get weaned 2 weeks earlier than the guidelines??? honest and genuine question not being sarcastic xx

 

[Puddingpea11]

what I dont understand is what if a baby is 2 weeks overdue does that mean they can get weaned 2 weeks earlier than the guidelines??? honest and genuine question not being sarcastic xx

I guess the answer would be no, as the digestive system only kicks in once baby is born? I think the midwife was explaining how the nose of the baby going past your perineum activates the gut (the bacteria around there).

Good question, would like to know the absolute correct answer.x

 

[xxClaire_24xx]

what I dont understand is what if a baby is 2 weeks overdue does that mean they can get weaned 2 weeks earlier than the guidelines??? honest and genuine question not being sarcastic xx

I guess the answer would be no, as the digestive system only kicks in once baby is born? I think the midwife was explaining how the nose of the baby going past your perineum activates the gut (the bacteria around there).

Good question, would like to know the absolute correct answer.x

but what if you have a section the babies head doesnt go past the perineum x

 

[Puddingpea11]

what I dont understand is what if a baby is 2 weeks overdue does that mean they can get weaned 2 weeks earlier than the guidelines??? honest and genuine question not being sarcastic xx

I guess the answer would be no, as the digestive system only kicks in once baby is born? I think the midwife was explaining how the nose of the baby going past your perineum activates the gut (the bacteria around there).

Good question, would like to know the absolute correct answer.x

but what if you have a section the babies head doesnt go past the perineum x

That's what we asked and she said that will activate on it's own eventually. Just happens to happen straight away after a natural birth because of the bacteria. Either way te digestive system is activated after baby is born.x

 

[AP]

As far as I was aware it was because of iron stores. This is why preemies are weaned at actual age. The iron stores start to dwindle bewtween 6-12 months from giving birth. Therefore being early or overdue makes no difference

 

[Puddingpea11]

I have posted this on another thread similiar to this in baby club, and thought I'd post it here to:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12180052

Its seems that no one can make their mind up and there is a lot of confusion on here and with the WHO too. Guidelines are always going to change as someone new will hve a "breakthrough" another will dispute that "breakthrough" and so on and so fourth.

 

[hivechild]

I have posted this on another thread similiar to this in baby club, and thought I'd post it here to:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12180052

Its seems that no one can make their mind up and there is a lot of confusion on here and with the WHO too. Guidelines are always going to change as someone new will hve a "breakthrough" another will dispute that "breakthrough" and so on and so fourth.

That article was almost immediately and widely dismissed by every health authority and organization worldwide when it was first released. Even the pediatric journal states it is nothing more than an opinion piece. There is no new research done, merely a different opinion and interpretation of the data found in original research and studies that resulted in current weaning guidelines.

Most of the writers involved in the published article have been sponsored by, or work for formula and baby food companies, so their impartiality is questioned.

The UK & US Pediatric authorities (I vaguely remember Canada, NZ and Australia speaking against it as well) have stated they are not changing the guidelines based on that article, nor do the WHO or UNICEF support it.

The media ran rampant with it at the time and blew things way out of proportion.

 

[Puddingpea11]

I have posted this on another thread similiar to this in baby club, and thought I'd post it here to:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12180052

Its seems that no one can make their mind up and there is a lot of confusion on here and with the WHO too. Guidelines are always going to change as someone new will hve a "breakthrough" another will dispute that "breakthrough" and so on and so fourth.

That article was almost immediately and widely dismissed by every health authority and organization worldwide when it was first released. Even the pediatric journal states it is nothing more than an opinion piece. There is no new research done, merely a different opinion and interpretation of the data found in original research and studies that resulted in current weaning guidelines.

Most of the writers involved in the published article have been sponsored by, or work for formula and baby food companies, so their impartiality is questioned.

The UK & US Pediatric authorities (I vaguely remember Canada, NZ and Australia speaking against it as well) have stated they are not changing the guidelines based on that article, nor do the WHO or UNICEF support it.

The media ran rampant with it at the time and blew things way out of proportion.

Ah I did not know that, only stubbled accross that today. It's all so bloody confusing...an a little stressful. I still think I will offer LO baby rice between 17 and 19 weeks to see if he is ready. I mean she is already fascinated in what we eat. If she's not ready then I'm gonna wait as long as she needs.

 

[hivechild]

I have posted this on another thread similiar to this in baby club, and thought I'd post it here to:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12180052

Its seems that no one can make their mind up and there is a lot of confusion on here and with the WHO too. Guidelines are always going to change as someone new will hve a "breakthrough" another will dispute that "breakthrough" and so on and so fourth.

That article was almost immediately and widely dismissed by every health authority and organization worldwide when it was first released. Even the pediatric journal states it is nothing more than an opinion piece. There is no new research done, merely a different opinion and interpretation of the data found in original research and studies that resulted in current weaning guidelines.

Most of the writers involved in the published article have been sponsored by, or work for formula and baby food companies, so their impartiality is questioned.

The UK & US Pediatric authorities (I vaguely remember Canada, NZ and Australia speaking against it as well) have stated they are not changing the guidelines based on that article, nor do the WHO or UNICEF support it.

The media ran rampant with it at the time and blew things way out of proportion.

Ah I did not know that, only stubbled accross that today. It's all so bloody confusing...an a little stressful. I still think I will offer LO baby rice between 17 and 19 weeks to see if he is ready. I mean she is already fascinated in what we eat. If she's not ready then I'm gonna wait as long as she needs.

I think it's more that they're fascinated in what we're doing, and not the actual food. I think you'll find that if you give them a spoon or a cup or something like that while you're eating, and if that keeps them entertained, that they're really not so interested in the food like it seems.

Really, your LO at that age might show the same interest in watching someone smoke a cigarette, or in pouring bleach down a toilet, but you're not going to let them do either of those things just because they look interested!

 

[NuKe]

I have posted this on another thread similiar to this in baby club, and thought I'd post it here to:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12180052

Its seems that no one can make their mind up and there is a lot of confusion on here and with the WHO too. Guidelines are always going to change as someone new will hve a "breakthrough" another will dispute that "breakthrough" and so on and so fourth.

That article was almost immediately and widely dismissed by every health authority and organization worldwide when it was first released. Even the pediatric journal states it is nothing more than an opinion piece. There is no new research done, merely a different opinion and interpretation of the data found in original research and studies that resulted in current weaning guidelines.

Most of the writers involved in the published article have been sponsored by, or work for formula and baby food companies, so their impartiality is questioned.

The UK & US Pediatric authorities (I vaguely remember Canada, NZ and Australia speaking against it as well) have stated they are not changing the guidelines based on that article, nor do the WHO or UNICEF support it.

The media ran rampant with it at the time and blew things way out of proportion.

Ah I did not know that, only stubbled accross that today. It's all so bloody confusing...an a little stressful. I still think I will offer LO baby rice between 17 and 19 weeks to see if he is ready. I mean she is already fascinated in what we eat. If she's not ready then I'm gonna wait as long as she needs.

why try it at that age at all? Why not just wait??