A thought on introducing solids...

[overcomer79]

DS was put on solids due to severe reflux to help calm it down because meds wouldn't helping. With dd, she just wasn't interested...she started about 5.5 months. I believe my ped is current on the guidelines because he does recommend ERF. I think maybe they will get there slowly. We did more BLW with dd to save money lol. Sorry off topic a bit.

 

[SaraEmily]

DS was put on solids due to severe reflux to help calm it down because meds wouldn't helping. With dd, she just wasn't interested...she started about 5.5 months. I believe my ped is current on the guidelines because he does recommend ERF. I think maybe they will get there slowly. We did more BLW with dd to save money lol. Sorry off topic a bit.

BLW is another huge benefit of waiting til later to wean. I started out with purees with my LO but after seeing the cost we made the switch and it was so much better.

 

[overcomer79]

We did too but sadly the daycare wouldn't feed her what they fed the toddlers. So we had to buy jars for them. Such a hassle!!

 

[kimberleyrobx]

I started giving solids to both my babies early on. Health visitors have to play by the rules, they aren't allowed to fill your head with thoughts. As a professional, they HAVE to go by the book, even if they don't agree. Nathan at 6 months was 22lbs and that's not down to starting him on solids early. Since birth he was taking 4-5oz every 2 hours and at one point he was taking 5oz every hour and a half, always on the dot like clock work! He was a big, hungry baby! And he had been on the hungrier baby milk since a couple of weeks old but it never made a difference. He drank his milk every 2 hours like clock work and the poor soul was always hungry! I was so relieved to start him on rusks, the solids made him a happier baby! Definitely go with your mother's instinct, if you think it's the right thing to do xx

 

[.Mrs.B.]

It's simple really;
Introducing solids at 4 months might cause allergies and issues such as IBS.
Sticking to just milk at 4 months will not.

I know which one I chose... I'm not fully convinced either but why take the risk with someone elses well being?

 

[lhancock90]

It's simple really;
Introducing solids at 4 months might cause allergies and issues such as IBS.
Sticking to just milk at 4 months will not.

I know which one I chose... I'm not fully convinced either but why take the risk with someone elses well being?

This.
It's taking a risk with someone else's body. Not your own. So I won't.

 

[overcomer79]

It's simple really;
Introducing solids at 4 months might cause allergies and issues such as IBS.
Sticking to just milk at 4 months will not.

I know which one I chose... I'm not fully convinced either but why take the risk with someone elses well being?

Any evidence? IMO it should be "might not"

 

[.Mrs.B.]

It's simple really;
Introducing solids at 4 months might cause allergies and issues such as IBS.
Sticking to just milk at 4 months will not.

I know which one I chose... I'm not fully convinced either but why take the risk with someone elses well being?

Any evidence? IMO it should be "might not"

Yes, agreed, you got me there.

 

[special_kala]

I assume she means wont introduce weaning related allergies because obviously there will be a percentage of people who were always going to have allergys regardless of weaning age

 

[overcomer79]

I assume she means wont introduce weaning related allergies because obviously there will be a percentage of people who were always going to have allergys regardless of weaning age

but how do we know that's the case? I'm not really convince either way tbh. I'm not trying to argue but you can't really prove that a baby weaned at six months won't have allergies due to weaning...idk I'm probably not making sense.

 

[PepsiChic]

I think this whole thread was started just to troll. the OP has only posted twice, both times on the first page. Both times she used strong wording to get a rise and reaction out of people.

This whole thread screams "troll" (not the people who are genuinely posting about the debate though)

 

[special_kala]

Exactly you dont know so why increase the risk

 

[minties]

Who would want the mess of weaning anyway? Before solids Sophie could easily wear the same clothes 3 days running. Not a spot of mess of her. Now I'm lucky if I get 3 hours out of an outfit.

 

[fieryphoenix]

I think this whole thread was started just to troll. the OP has only posted twice, both times on the first page. Both times she used strong wording to get a rise and reaction out of people.

This whole thread screams "troll" (not the people who are genuinely posting about the debate though)

I thought the same thing, the op lit a shit storm, then walked away.

 

[sbl]

Who would want the mess of weaning anyway? Before solids Sophie could easily wear the same clothes 3 days running. Not a spot of mess of her. Now I'm lucky if I get 3 hours out of an outfit.

^^^^This!!!!

 

[PepsiChic]

I think this whole thread was started just to troll. the OP has only posted twice, both times on the first page. Both times she used strong wording to get a rise and reaction out of people.

This whole thread screams "troll" (not the people who are genuinely posting about the debate though)

I thought the same thing, the op lit a shit storm, then walked away.

yup we should turn it around and all agree on something instead...or share photos of the mess out babies make regards of when or what they are being weaned on!

 

[SaraEmily]

I assume she means wont introduce weaning related allergies because obviously there will be a percentage of people who were always going to have allergys regardless of weaning age

but how do we know that's the case? I'm not really convince either way tbh. I'm not trying to argue but you can't really prove that a baby weaned at six months won't have allergies due to weaning...idk I'm probably not making sense.

She's not saying they absolutely won't. She's saying that if you wean before 6 months you're increasing the risk, so why take that chance? Obviously some people will develop allergies no matter what age they were weaned, especially if they have a family history of allergies.

 

[overcomer79]

Exactly you dont know so why increase the risk

Not disagreeing but it takes fact for me hence why I am not convinced either way

 

[jenniferttc1]

Just cause they hit milestones early, doesn't mean their digestive system is that advanced. Doctor sounds like the best I've heard in awhile, most push it at that age. My mom started me early and I have horrible digestive problems

 

[pinklightbulb]

I got told different advice by different doctors about both my sons, who at the same age were the same weight.

I got a second opinion about my first son, who I was told to wean, and was told NOT to wean. Went back to the first GP and advised them what I had been told, and she shrugged and said at "this age" (4 months) she recommended weaning no matter what the baby's size. The second GP was horrified and insisted I wait, and told me that not every GP is up to date on guidelines-- and this from one GP about another. Is that not proof doctors aren't God and they aren't always right? Obviously, I stuck with the opinion of the second GP.

When I got referred to a paed for my second son, they told me to wean as breast milk wasn't enough and he didn't "weigh enough", in spite of the first physician I saw, and then the second, telling me he was fine. It turned out my HV, who had referred me, was telling the paed that I "starved" my son on breast milk, and because I wouldn't FF, she was "advising" I wean, and the paed agreed based on her "notes" (which were all basically bashing me for BFing as my baby was so "small" and he needed "more").

I am 4'10" and 42kg on a good day. My sons were 5lb 3oz and 5lb 1oz born. They weren't going to magically become 50th percentile babies as soon as they were outside me. Still, the paed listened to the HV and it kicked off a heap of shit I just didn't need. The second paed I saw, told me my son was just little and what was I doing thinking of weaning when he was nowhere near ready?

Did I mention my sons followed basically the exact same growth pattern, right up till 1 year, when they weighed exactly the same? Two babies, same size, different advice from many professionals-- and I can tell which ones researched and which just blindly "believed" early weaning solved all because in "their day" that's what people did.

My point is, is if even health "professionals" (I use this lightly about HVs, since they are included in my story above) can't agree, why not err on the side of caution and pick the safer guideline of 6 months? It's been researched and wouldn't have changed from 4 to 6 for some flimsy reason. Science backs it up. Anecdotal evidence, as well as "in my day", does not.