WHO growth charts

[jamiesam]

Just discovered these online - towards the bottom of the page.

Can't find ds's red books to find out how much difference they make - can anyone summarise? Am particularly interested in differences in the first 6/12 months for average baby...

Or even better, suggest where I may have left the red books

[belgo]

I am so relieved to find the WHO growth charts - my 10 month old daughter is way under the standard growth charts used here in Belgium - but according to these new charts she is just within normal. She's healthy and developing fine, and that's what's more important.

[jamiesam]

bump

(not sure if i can take credit or if you'd already found them Belgo? good to know that they confirm what you already thought about your daughter)

[belgo]

I found the charts a couple of months ago, and I believe that they are based on a sample of 'perfect' breastfed babies. The shapes of the curve show that bf babies put on weight fast in the first couple of months, after that their weight gain tails of, even though they are perfectly healthy. The average weight is less, and the curves show that babies can be a lot lighter but are still healthy, my baby is a perfect example of this. These curves also mean that babies who were previously average will be considered above the average. The curves represent how babies should grow, which isn't the same as how babies do grow, and that pisses some people off.

[JoolsToo]

belgo - if she's healthy and developing fine - why relieved.

bloody charts will be the death of us!

[Quootiepie]

i found hose but couldnt download them... checking again now

[Quootiepie]

those, not hose

[jamiesam]

Jools - I was in similar position to Belgo with ds2 - according to the charts he wasn't progressing (weight or height) and so I got referral to paediatrician. She took one look at him and nearly laughed - he has always been the picture of health. Even now at age 3, I worry about him as he doesn't have his big brother's appetite. It's hard to get 'advice' from professionals - even if it's only a chart - and say, ah, but I'm a mum and I know better. I'm trying, but it is hard!

[jamiesam]

belgo - thanks by the way, that sounds about right, ds2 followed the chart until he was around 5 months and then went off and did his owne (bf) thing!

[prettybird]

The other thing is that even this charts are still averages. Some children don't follow "typical" growth curves.

My ds - exclusively breast fed - wold have dropped even further undereanth these WHO charts. He was extremely slow to gain wait - dropping form the 91st at birth, taking 7 weeks to regain brith weight and progressively slipping dwon the chart until he chuntered along just underneath. He never actaully lost weight - he just never gained enough per week.

He was seen by the breast feeding counsellors at the manternity hosptial, who weren't too bothered but referred him to the consultant paediatrican just in case. He took one look at this happy, healthy and alert - abelit light baby and told me to inginre the charts, he would eventually climb somewhere into the bottowm part of them and to stop the faff of expressing. No question of formual - he was fully supportive of the breast feeding.

As it was, he did just that. he is now nearly 6 and I don't have a clue where he is on the growth cruves - at his 3 year check he was on about the 50th.

The breast feeding counsellors said he was great example of how you should look at the whole baby, not just at the chart. he was so obvioulsy a &non^ "failure to thrive" baby - yet an ill informed HV could easily have put pressure on me. (As it was, I just avoided them

[pamirka]

Interesting, those WHO charts put DD at +2 for both length and weight, whereas the Little Red Book has her off the chart for length and near the top for weight! According to our doc, the charts in the LRB are being revised as they're based on old measurements.