I almost didn’t post about this despite how mad it made me when I read the first article… But I saw a post on it today, which linked to another article about it w/ links to others and it has me going all over again lol.
Apparently a researcher at Wayne State University put out a study saying 1/3 of 9 month olds are obese.
Now I’m not going to say that its not possible for a child that young to be… its sad, but yeah… it does happen. I’m also not going to say there’s nothing good in the study. They did mention that exclusive breastfeeding, no formula or solids, for 6 months can prevent obesity (yes there are studies there too). They also mentioned the importance of healthy eating (no McD’s for babies), not putting cereal in the baby’s bottle, choosing fruits and vegetables over juice. I will say MSNBC’s article (just read that one) has me scratching my head over saying they need them pureed.. but that’s a common thought now a days so.. eh. As much as I would have liked to see Baby Led mentioned (because it can factor in too) I didn’t really expect that.
So yeah.. some good mentioned in these articles.
My problem? My problem is how exactly they are coming up with who is obese and who is “overweight” and “at risk”. They are going by percentages!
I’m sorry, but percentages aren’t worth… well I’m sure you can fill in the blank any which way you choose. Watching an individual baby’s growth pattern sure. A drastic drop or gain could show a problem. But babies aren’t clones. They’re individuals. They have different genetic factors. So when you put them on a chart against each other… it doesn’t tell you a whole lot on its own. Ok so your kid is smaller than a certain number of babies. Mine might be bigger. If one of them is missing developmental milestones on top of being on an extreme end (or off of it) then yeah there might be a worry. Plenty of diapers and meeting milestones = most likely there is not an issue.
But this study has decided (or the… people… in charge of it have) that a baby at the 95th percentile or above is “obese” and above 85 is “overweight and/or at risk”.
One article, MSNBC (and yes I’m going to link all 3 at the bottom here), does mention that high birth weight has nothing to do with obesity later on… and points out that some of those babies thin out. Yeah, that’s true. We have seen a drastic thinning out on Zavier lately. I was going to say he slipped down to around the 85th percentile (so from “obese” to “at risk”) but since its not on our paperwork and I didn’t want to rely on memory I just pulled up the charts online to check… and going off of the CDC ones that these researchers used Zavier was just over the 95th percentile for weight at 6 months. Good news I’m taking from that is proof our pedi uses the WHO charts lol. Downside is I want to strangle someone even more now (call my child fat). Note: want too = wouldn’t do it.
Like I said before you can’t tell that w/out looking at other factors besides numbers. It just doesn’t work that way!
And… as my looking at numbers shows… a baby born over 10lbs, even after thinning out, is not going to just mystically magically (to use Baba’s phrase) jump down to 50%. And if they did.. IT’D BE A MAJOR REASON TO WORRY! Just going from off the charts to 85th or 86th (by WHO charts obviously) was enough for our pedi to comment. Thankfully she wasn’t worried, but still commented.
Now.. my other issue (getting past this whole thing being flawed and feeling more than a little insulted here) is what exactly is this gonna do to our kids? We already have major weight complex’s here… So lets start labeling infants? Yeah that’s gonna go over well. Our poor children…
Unfortunately we do have to address the whole obesity issue and focusing on proper nutrition from the start is a great way to do it, but not at their expense either… Sure promote breastfeeding, eating healthy, not giving junk at such an early age.. exercise… but this is just going too far.
Links (in order I read them):