to think that this is an appropriate portion size for a 5 year old?

[EnchanciaAnthem]

This was DD's dinner. She is a very healthy weight. My cousin was here with her 4 year old girl, who I gave the same size portion - yet my cousin asked for extra everything for her DD as what I'd put out wasn't 'enough'.

They had ricecakes as an after school snack too.

My breasts get in the way of many of my ribs Not that I'd be able to see them anyway these days.

DH doesn't have visible ribs he is quite muscular though.

Not one size fits all, is it.

I think a lot of people, when told ribs should be visible, will get an image in their head which I am sure is not what is being suggested. Can anyone post a picture of what they mean when they say visible ribs - and what ages from and to? Are toddlers supposed to have ribs which arevisible? Does that mean sticking out / obvious gaps in between (which is what my imagination conjures up) which I would think was on the low side of healthy surely.

A lot of people have distorted ideas about things and I worry that someone reading that their children's ribs should stick out might head off down an inadvisable path.

I don't think I've ever seen that line in official advice if you get my drift.

I looked at mine too! They were in the bath and their ribs were only obvious when they bent in certain ways.

To me "visible" means "obvious" IYSWIM and conjures up visions like on the news, or on people who are healthy but terribly lean (some of the men at work who do long distance running for example).

TBH I dont' remember my ribs being obvious when I was a teen / young woman and was very slender.

Is this not a build thing rather than a hard and fast rule to follow?

Pictures would help!

My 11 year old DS has ribs you can see and indeed in very bony generally. He gets called skinny at school because its so unusual among his peers.

You can see dd1s ribs spine and shoulder blades.

Dd2 just the ribs. Still has toddler pot belly and my thighs but her arms are slim and face.

Would you guys say that it would be a suitable general health message?

Do you think that "visible" is a bit subjective?

I am just not sure about it and I bet people have different ideas in their head when they conjure an image of "visible ribs"!

Visible ribs just means you can see the outline of them rather than them being covered in a layer of fat, not that they are sticking out. Like this

The ribs thing all seems to come back to a single statement from Professor Mary Rudolf with no further explanation. I would really like to know more.

I can't see his ribs!

OK I had a xylophone image in my head - able to easily see each rib.

Ditto the spine - each spine nobble sticking out.

My children are more slender than the boy in the pic but I wouldn't have put them in the "thin enough for Sirzy" category IYSWIM.

This is why I wonder if it is a poor guideline.

So actually it means "able to see the shape of the ribcage"?

I really think it is a bit of a dodgy message given people's concern about their children's weight, many people's own relationships with food & their own bodies, and a lack of education and people becoming disconnected from what is normal to look at. Given that many people will think xylophone, and some will act on that in a way that is not positive.

It's too much of a poorly defined and subjective measure.

Like this. Not emaciated but can see hipbones and lower ribs.

"A child should have ribs clearly showing"

That does not describe that boy, and would not to many people.

Sirzy, is that image what you had in mind or did you mean xylophone?

It's not really a "guideline" though is it? Just a rule of thumb. It means seeing the outline of the rib cage not emaciated.

Yes thats what I meant, clearly able to see the outline of ribs. IE not carrying excess fat

Yes but when most people read or hear "ribs clearly showing" they think xylophone.

It would be better put as "able to see the outline of the ribcage", probably.

I have seen it quite a few times on here and it always makes me worry that some parents are going to take away the message of xylophone and worry uneccessarily / act inappropriately.

Do they? I don't

YY it'sallgoingto be fine, he looks completely normal. I wouldn't say his ribs were obviously visible though.

Could I make a little request? For those who like to use this on threads about children / fatness can you use the visible outline of ribcage phrasing rather than the clearly showing ribs wording? Ribs is the individual bones and I think I'm not alone in having a totally different idea of what was meant.

Well ribs are the individual bones, and so clearly visible ribs will mean (understandably) to a lot of people that every individual bone should be clearly visible.

The outline of the whole is the ribcage which conjures a different image.

Honestly people will think xylophone, not every thinks the exact same way and the ribs are the individual bones IYSWIM.

You don't have to put it differently of course if you don't want, but I think it would be nicer maybe more clear or something avoid misunderstandings?

Sorry trying to respond to multiple posts with what was obviously teh same answer

A typical 5 yr old needs 1800 calories a day so a lunch should provide about 600- i don't think yours does, and I think it is a bit light on carbs.

Has the boy in Fledermaus picture got his hand down his shorts?

My 2 year old would eat more than that some days but he is huge (not fat, he's in the 99.6 per centile for weight and height so he's proportion)

Other days he lives on fresh air.

Depends on the child. It looks very healthy and balanced. If your DD said she was full and she's a healthy weight I wouldn't be worried