Overweight Mothers give birth to fat babies?

[worraliberty]

AIBU to think that measuring the BMI of babies in the womb, is a step too far? I mean, surely a child's birth weight (unless it's extremely high/low) isn't exactly an indicator of anything much...considering all babies feed differently?

My DS2 was only 5lb 7oz (the smallest by far of my 3 DS) and yet, he's the heaviest of all of them and gained about an ounce per day from birth.

Other babies, can be born heavy and lose an ounce a day....so what does the study really mean in terms of anything much?

www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8788593/Overweight-mothers-give-birth-to-fat-babies-study-finds.html

[tittybangbang]

"surely a child's birth weight (unless it's extremely high/low) isn't exactly an indicator of anything much...considering all babies feed differently?"

Actually it's said to be a very important signifier for heart and circulatory disease in adulthood.

Very small babies who grow fast are at increased risk of ill-health in adulthood.

Babies born with a large amount of adipose tissue (as opposed to babies who are big because they are long and big-boned) are more at risk of - can't remember actually, but they are more at risk of ill health in adulthood.

It does worry me a bit. My second baby was 11lbs at birth - very, very fat, not very big. He's now a very small boy of 8. Too much sugar in the womb. (I had diabetes - wasn't fat myself though).

[earthpixie]

There was a documentary on recently about how higher birth weight babies tend to have better health generally throughout life and longer life expectancies. They'd done extensive research over a number of years. An Indian doctor had done lots of research into the 'fat-thin' Indian phenomenon, where underweight Indians with low birth weights were getting obesity diseases like Type 2 diabetes. It was all about how the body fat was stored in the body. People whose mums were malnourished/ very underweight tended to store weight in the womb in an abnormal and unhealthy way, so even though they were tiny babies they had an obese person's health profile.

[earthpixie]

..of course, it didn't mean that being very overweight whilst pg was a GOOD thing!

[Triggles]

I was a healthy weight when pregnant with DD, and overweight when pregnant with DS2 & DS3. All 3 weighed roughly the same, around 8lb at birth. I personally think that there are a lot of variables involved - it's just not as simple as "heavy mum, heavy baby" at all.

[lesley33]

And research into this field can help Dr's in the future develop advice that will tackle these issues. It could also help adults. For example, if because of your birth weight you are at a higher risk of type 2 diabetes, the GP could advise you that it was even more important for you not to develop other risk factors such as smoking or being overweight.

[worraliberty]

That's interesting Titty I hadn't realised that.

[worraliberty]

Triggles it would be interesting to know if the fat distribution was different

[MrsMooo]

I don't think it is going to far, anything that helps us make informed choices about our childs potential health...

I do wonder how much is down to (maternal) metablolism and how much is due to diet e.g. would an overwieght mum who ate healthly whilst pregnant's baby have less fat than the baby of an ideal weight mum who ate a very high fat diet - I also thought that overwieght people often have faster metabolisms due to the excess effort of organs because of being bigger iyswim

[clam]

I'm overweight. Size 18 16.
DS was 7lbs1oz and DD 6lbs3oz.

Do I buck the trend?

[worraliberty]

clam again no-one knows what the fat distribution was like in your babies, so that can't be answered.

[Tillyscoutsmum]

DD was 9lb 12oz and DS was 10lb 5oz. They both had big abdomens and were little chubsters. I suppose I'm a little bit overweight (about a size 12-14).

[clam]

Have clearly committed the cardinal MN sin of not reading the whole thread.

[umf]

There are lots of things you could do to improve health outcomes for UK babies. They're all a bit tediously obvious, though, like having enough midwives or training GPs better. No snazzy research headlines from those.

[worraliberty]

It's easily done

[worraliberty]

My post was to clam obviously

I agree umf but research needs to continue in to lots of things as well as sorting staff problems.

[tittybangbang]

"They're all a bit tediously obvious, though, like having enough midwives or training GPs better. No snazzy research headlines from those."

Actually reduction of smoking in pregnancy and improving the diets of mothers before and during pregnancy would probably do a lot too.

[LieInsAreRarerThanTigers]

I am no expert but did have a discussion with a friend who is a nurse and was training as a health visitor - she was learning that a lot of overweight mothers have low birthweight babies as overweight mothers generally have poorer health, poorer diets and greater risk of premature birth, complications like pre-eclampsia leading to early delivery etc.

[worraliberty]

I think there's been a massive reduction in smoking during pregnancy over the years...certainly since the 80's.

However there has been a massive rise in overweight/obese pregnant women. The report says.....

Today about half of all women of childbearing age in the UK are overweight or obese

That's way more than the amount of smoking pregnant women, I'm sure.

[lesley33]

clam - There are also other things that affect birth weight in babies, so nobody can comment on your individual situation.

umf - Actually the research could make a big difference in understanding risk factors. For example the research into babies and risk of type 2 diabetes might give a much better way of identifying those adults at risk of this and thus early treatment or prevention. It might help Dr's understand more about diseases and what causes them to develop in the first place.

And it could lead to better advice to pregnant mothers in the future. For example, just telling pregnant mothers to eat and live healthier wouldn't have led to the reduction in spina bifida that is a result of advice about folic acid.

[FellatioNelson]

I put on 2.5 stones in PG1, and baby was 7lb 1oz. He was a nicely slim (but not scrawny) baby and he is a slim but not scrawny 18 year old now.

I put on 3.5 stone with PG two and baby weighed 8lb 6oz. He was really chubby up until about 18 months then went skinny and is very, very skinny now at 16.

I put on only two stone in PG3 and baby weighed 7lb 13 oz, so the weight was more baby and less 'me' fat than my previous PGs. He was a pefectly sized slim child up until he was about 9, when he started to pile on weight at a rate of knots for no obvious reason, and he is now 12 and is far too chubby and getting bigger.

I think there is no rhyme or reason to any of this.

[lesley33]

And at the moment, there are other anomalies like the Chinese one about risk factors for circulatory diseases - see above where Type 2 Diabetes soaring amongst Chinese in spite of much lower amount of overweight/obese people than other countries and high amount of physical activity. In west both high weight and inactivity seen as major risk factors.

There are the same population anomalies with different countries around amount of salt and/or fat consumed and circulatory diseases.

If research into babies can help Drs understand these illnesses better and thus improve prevention and treatment, then I think that can only be a good thing.

[sheepgomeep]

my last two babies were 9lb 8.5 and 9lb 12.5 oz. I wasn't overweight when pg with both of those but had borderline gest diabetes. These younger two have a different father to my first two and morbid obesity is a huge problem in my younger girls dads family.

Both of my younger huge babies are very slender now, they never guzzled thier milk and both were slow to gain weight in the beginning.

My friends babies were born 4lb and 5lb. She was a heavy smoker and I'm talking 30 to 40 a day aged 19 , one was prem because he stopped growing and both to this day eat as if there was no tomorrow, have gained weight rapidly and both children are borderline obese

[all4u]

Did anyone see the recent Horizon proigramme on birthweight? Apparently overwhelming evidence correlates higher birthweight with health in later life and hence longevity! It is the mother's state of nutrition during pregnancy which matters. Apparently babies born to poorly nourished mothers are more likely to be obese later in life with all the health consequences...
Crucially though it is important to know when you conceive - and many are blissfully unaware well into the first trimester. So plan plan plan and optimise nutrition starting 3 months before conception. It is good that nutrition is finally being recognised as vital when for centurues it has been the poor relation of medicine (witness hospital food!). As for the Mum's weight - well that is a burden on her heart and makes pregnancy and childbirth very tough so the message ought to be go easy on yourself and the route for both mother and baby is sound nutrition! No sticks to beat anyone with please

[lesley33]

I don't think anyone is trying to beat mothers here with any sticks. We do the best we can. And as you point out, lots of mums don't know they are pregnant in the first trimester.

But the research can help not just future babies, but those already born. So according to the research on Horizon your friends childrens are at much higher risk of circulatory diseases and premature death than fat children who were born a healthy weight. So Dr's should in the future target children/adults like this for preventative advice and as adults regular checks on things such as blood pressure.

[HomemadeCakes]

It seems ridiculous.

I was always fairly small (size 10-12) and even at my heaviest near the end of my PG, my BMI on the standard chart was still within healthy, yet DD's stomach was above the 50th Centile on the scans, where her legs and head were on the 25th.

But then it turned out I had GD, so maybe there was something underlying like that in those particular mothers.