logo
My baby was potty-trained when she was three weeks old – people are stunned but method is a LOT easier than you think

My baby was potty-trained when she was three weeks old – people are stunned but method is a LOT easier than you think

The Sun07-05-2025

MANY parents will know the struggle of potty training kids and many painstaking months trying to get them into a routine.
However, one mum has claimed she managed to crack it when her baby Sequoia was just three weeks old - and she insists it's 'easier than you think.'
Chloe, who shares her motherhood experiences on her @infinite.creators page, said: 'What if I told you my baby has been potty trained since three weeks old?
'It's actually a LOT easier than you think.
'I couldn't believe how quickly I was able to tune into her body language and cues — and start catching nearly all of her pees and poops in the potty.
'Contrary to popular belief, babies do communicate when they need to go.
'We just usually don't recognise it — or label it as them being 'fussy'.'
Chloe swears by doing Elimination Communication (EC) with her daughter, which is where parents watch out for signals that their child needs to go to the toilet and give them the chance to use the potty, rather than get used to doing it in their nappy.
The method, favoured by comedian Katherine Ryan, sees the child learn how to use a potty from an extremely early age.
Chloe added: 'I love it not just because we only go through maybe two diapers a day… but because it's strengthened our bond and deepened my intuitive connection with her.
'Fun fact: newborns *do* have a fully developed bladder sphincter.
'They can hold their pee — and they don't actually want to soil themselves.'
You have 20/20 vision if you can spot the 'silly emoji' in the potty training illusion in less than 10 seconds
The mum, who has racked up over 11,000 followers, shared exactly how she managed to potty train her daughter at three weeks.
She explained: 'I always potty her right after waking up in the morning or after naps. She *always* pees or poops within 5 minutes of waking.
'She usually also goes 5–10 minutes after feeding.
'Outside of those times, she naturally pees about every 45 minutes — I just watch for her patterns.
'I use sound cues: 'pssssssst' for pee and a fart sound for poop. She now associates those with releasing.
2
'After she goes, I celebrate her with a big 'yayyy good job!' — and she lights up. She genuinely loves it.
'Sometimes we sit for 2–3 minutes while she waits for the poop or pee to come. Patience is everything.'
The mum influencer added that they don't always catch every elimination 'especially in the beginning.'
She concluded: 'It's not about perfection, it's about consistency.'
Many people were quick to chime in with their views, with one saying: 'Great job mama'.
Another added: 'This is amazing!'
A third commented: 'I'm really wanting to try this, but I'm worried about how much time it takes up.'
NHS potty training timeline
THE NHS says most children are potty trained between two and two-and-a-half, saying: "Remember, you cannot force your child to use a potty.
"If they're not ready, you will not be able to make them use it.
"Most parents start thinking about potty training when their child is between 2 and 2 and a half, but there's no perfect time."
By age 1, most babies have stopped doing poos at night
By age 2, some children will be dry during the day, but this is still quite early
By age 3, 9 out of 10 children are dry most days – even then, all children have the odd accident, especially when they're excited, upset or absorbed in something else
By age 4, most children are reliably dry during the day

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

EPA says power plant carbon emissions aren't dangerous. We asked 30 scientists: Here's what they say
EPA says power plant carbon emissions aren't dangerous. We asked 30 scientists: Here's what they say

The Independent

time3 hours ago

  • The Independent

EPA says power plant carbon emissions aren't dangerous. We asked 30 scientists: Here's what they say

The Trump administration's Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed a new ruling that heat-trapping carbon gas "emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution.'' The Associated Press asked 30 different scientists, experts in climate, health and economics, about the scientific reality behind this proposal. Nineteen of them responded, all saying that the proposal was scientifically wrong and many of them called it disinformation. Here's what eight of them said. 'This is the scientific equivalent to saying that smoking doesn't cause lung cancer,' said climate scientist Zeke Hausfather of the tech firm Stripe and the temperature monitoring group Berkeley Earth. 'The relationship between CO2 emissions and global temperatures has been well established since the late 1800s, and coal burning is the single biggest driver of global CO2 emissions, followed by oil and gas. It is utterly nonsensical to say that carbon emissions from power plants do not contribute significantly to climate change.' "It's about as valid as saying that arsenic is not a dangerous substance to consume," said University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Michael Mann. "The world is round, the sun rises in the east, coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change, and climate change increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms, infectious diseases, and many other health threats. These are indisputable facts," said Dr. Howard Frumkin, former director of the National Center for Environmental Health and a retired public health professor at the University of Washington. Climate economist R. Daniel Bressler of Columbia University, said: 'We can use tools from climate economics, including the mortality cost of carbon and the social cost of carbon, to estimate the climate impacts of these emissions. For instance, in my past work, I found that adding just one year's worth of emissions from an average-sized coal-fired plant in the U.S. causes 904 expected temperature-related deaths and over $1 billion in total climate damages.' University of Arizona climate scientist Kathy Jacobs said: "Their statement is in direct conflict with evidence that has been presented by thousands of scientists from almost 200 countries for decades. 'It's basic chemistry that burning coal and natural gas releases carbon dioxide and it's basic physics that CO2 warms the planet. We've known these simple facts since the mid-19th century,' said Oregon State's Phil Mote. Andrew Weaver, a professor at the University of Victoria and former member of parliament in British Columbia, said: 'President Trump is setting himself up for international court charges against him for crimes against humanity. To proclaim you don't want to deal with climate change is one thing, but denying the basic science can only be taken as a wanton betrayal of future generations for which there should be consequences.' Stanford climate scientist Chris Field, who coordinated an international report linking climate change to increasingly deadly extreme weather, summed it up this way: "It is hard to imagine a decision dumber than putting the short-term interests of oil and gas companies ahead of the long-term inters of our children and grandchildren." ___ Matthew Daly and Michael Phillis contributed from Washington. The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at

Women's supplements brand O Positiv explores sale, sources say
Women's supplements brand O Positiv explores sale, sources say

Reuters

time3 hours ago

  • Reuters

Women's supplements brand O Positiv explores sale, sources say

NEW YORK, June 11 (Reuters) - O Positiv Health is exploring a sale that could value the women's health supplements company at around $1 billion, according to three people familiar with the matter. The founder-owned business is working with investment bank Jefferies on the sale effort, said the sources, who added that O Positiv is projecting $275 million of revenue this year after generating around $225 million in 2024. The sources cautioned that no deal was guaranteed, and spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private information. Jefferies declined to comment. O Positiv did not respond to a comment request. Siblings Bobby and Brianna Bitton launched O Positiv in 2018. The company makes vitamins and probiotics that address a variety of health concerns, from PMS and menopause symptoms to vaginal and gut health. The products are sold on the company's website, as well as through retailers including Walmart (WMT.N), opens new tab, Target (TGT.N), opens new tab and Amazon (AMZN.O), opens new tab. Consumer health companies and private equity firms alike have put more emphasis on investing in the women's health space in recent years, which has created a significant pool of buyers for brands founded by entrepreneurs. Such deals include Pharmavite buying Bonafide in November 2023 and L Catterton, in partnership with actress Naomi Watts, acquiring Stripes Beauty last year.

US CDC restores jobs for 450 laid-off employees
US CDC restores jobs for 450 laid-off employees

Reuters

time3 hours ago

  • Reuters

US CDC restores jobs for 450 laid-off employees

June 11 (Reuters) - The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is reinstating some 450 employees laid off under the Trump administration's massive reduction of the federal workforce, a government spokesperson said on Wednesday. The employees had worked for the National Center for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and Tuberculosis Prevention, the National Center for Environmental Health, the Immediate Office of the Director and the Global Health Center (GHC), according to Fox News. A spokesperson for the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department, which oversees the CDC, confirmed the report. Their work includes oversight of lead poisoning prevention, toxic chemical spills, air quality as well as global disease surveillance, according to the CDC's website. Many of the employees were part of the mass layoffs of 10,000 staffers at U.S. health agencies announced in April by President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk to shrink the federal government and slash spending. Some 2,400 CDC jobs were slated for cuts under the plan. Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr later said that some of those roles would be reinstated after an outcry over the potential for increased risks to public health. In an email from Thomas Nagy of HHS seen by Reuters, employees were told that their reduction in force or RIF notices had been revoked and that they should contact their immediate supervisor with questions. Some of the reinstated employees were from the CDC's Lead Poisoning Prevention and Surveillance Branch, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters. That program had been scheduled to be included in a new HHS division called the Administration for a Healthy America, or AHA.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store