Can someone help me with EDD date. Scan isnt matching.

[Nbg]

I know this is my second thread but having a good think about things my scan cannot possibly be right and my MW has said early scan are more accurate!

Background info. First day of LMP was 10th Feb. It was a very light period and lasted only 3 days. Not normal for me at all. Anyway, first date of the LMP before that was 16th Jan.
So going on those two dates, my cycle was 25 days.

Now i have inputed all this info into the BBC's pg calculator and that says I'm 11 weeks and 1 day, which makes sense.
However going on the scan, I am 9 weeks and 1 day.

9 weeks just doesnt seem right and even accounting for late ovulation, it still doesnt cover it.

Any thoughts?

[Nbg]

Oh and just to add. The MW originally thought that the period in feb could have been an impantation bleed.

Also in the picture we have you can clearly see babys head, body and makings of legs. Not sure you would get that at 7 weeks.

[trace2]

nbg i carnt make sence of it but all i can say is thats what they did with me and my dates dont fit either, cos i did have late ovultation that month on day 20 then had impantation bleed 3 days after so i tested and got bfp! and i do know i ovulted then coz i did person and sticks also did my temp.
if all that makes sence

[Nbg]

Yes that makes sense.

I just dont get it lol

Especially as you can see babys bits.
In fact will put photo on my profile.

[cazzybabs]

scans pictures at different weeks to compare yours too

[Nbg]

gosh you were quick

thanks cazzy

[Nbg]

now looking at the link cazzy has put on, the 9 week one matches mine and that would tally.

[cazzybabs]

But you are not allowed to slope off and join the due in November thread now.....

I don't know aht your mw is going on about....i would have thought ealier scans are less accurate as things are so small its hard to measure and tiny mistakes lead to weeks difference.

[Nbg]

Well thats what I thought cazzy. I know the internal scans are more accurate but didnt think the ultrasound ones were tbh.

I'll probably stick with the dec thread because even if I am further along, my babies like to be fashionably late

[SparklyGothKat]

My early scan didn't match my dates, at all!! She said I was only 5 weeks, which meant I tested postive on a HPT 2 days after I convieved, lol. Anyway when I went for a scan at 9+6 weeks (by my dates) baby was 9+5 weeks, just one day out of my dates. There is a pic on my profile of the scan at 9 weeks, if that helps any

[Nbg]

Now your picture looks like mine. You can actually see the body parts.

[SparklyGothKat]

I think scans are better now. I was looking at my scan at 9 weeks of DS and you can't see a thing

[JARM]

awww NBG, you are gonna leave me standing arent you!

The scan picture I have from Rebecca put me at 9 weeks, and is similar to yours, so yeah, I reckon you are a bit further on.

When is the next scan???

Im just waiting for my date to come through, hopefully be for next week some time.

[SparklyGothKat]

come onto the november thread, I'm there!! (if you are further on)

[Nbg]

Next scan is 15th May when, going on their date, I would be 12 weeks but going on what I think, I'll be 14 weeks.

I'll feel awful leaving the dec thread lol
As I said though, my babies are always late.

[JARM]

well hopefully mine will be early this time then lol

[Nbg]

lol.
Me too.
It would be a nice last baby if it comes early or actually on time.
D wasnt too bad at 4 days late but ds at 10 days was absolute hell.

[JARM]

I was induced early with Jessi, but Becca was 40+5.

Grrrrrrr..... jsut when i think i have a buddy!!!

[Nbg]

lol
Theres still time yet.

I'll probably go on the 15th and they'll stick to their dates and it'll be a small baby or something.

Seems odd though as dd wasn't small and ds was definatley not small!

[JARM]

lol bless ya, only 2 weeks til the scan though you LUCKY thing!

[ShowOfHands]

The reason they say it is more accurate is that all babies tend to grow at the same rate until 12 weeks so they like to assume for example that if the fetus measures 11mm then you are approximately 7 weeks. From 12 weeks genetics kick in and all babies grow at different rates, have different measurements etc. The problem lies in what they can actually see, how good the machine is, who measures it etc. I had two scans 3 days apart and at the first I was told I was nearly 9 weeks, at the second only 7 weeks. And I knew when I had conceived so I was 7+4 at the first scan and 8 weeks at the second. Ironically my 12 and 20 week scans agree exactly with my own dates. Sorry for the ramble but I suppose my point is I knew for certain when I conceived and they still tried to tell me otherwise. And at a 7+4 and an 8 week scan the 'baby' was a 'blob'. No arms at all.

Oh and you can post on two antenatal threads, lots of people who have date queries do and they get the best of two lots of gossip!

[Nbg]

Oooh I quite like the sund of posting on two threads
Although dont know if my brain could hack it.

A already on a post natal one.

The measurements they gave me were 11.1mm.