to think this BMI calculator is bollocks?

[onemiddlefinger]

I'm not particularly concerned with my DS's weight but just after reading another thread I went and checked the NHS BMI calculator and apparently he is VERY OVERWEIGHT!!!

He certainly is big but he is also very tall for his age (2yrs 3 mnts), when recently seeing a pediatrician (for another reason) I did ask if there is anything we should be worried about regarding his size (way over the 99th percentile in weight and height for his age) and she assured that he was in proportion and he was fine. So how do these BMI calculators work?
I find this result to be a bit shocking and complete bollocks at the same time.

Ok I posted to say dd is 75th centile for weight and 91st for height. Just checked her vitals and used the NHS BMI thing and she is 45th centile, so those saying that height and weight plotting together on the higher centiles may still make the child overweight seem to be correct - as dd is lower for weight yet still coming out average.

I used her stats for when she was 2 as well out of interest and she was 61st centile, I would say lots slim out from 2 to 3.

Yanbu that particular bmi calculator produces some strange results. It adjusts for centiles but in my experience can sometimes put children who are underweight into the healthy weight range.

Or we think healthy children are underweight when actually they aren't?

jimi bmi numbers only work for adults. Children are a very different shape, so the results are adjusted into percentiles.
A bmi of 16 is fine for a 6yo, but not for a 36yo.

bmi numbers only work for adults
WRONG
That is why both the NHS and the NIH have specific children's calculators - linked upthread

As an adult, if your bmi is over 25, be honest... are you porky or peachy? Mine is currently 25.5. I am far from slim, and my waist is too big, though I did have people coming over all concerned for me when I managed to get it down to 23, a few years ago.

talkinpeace I think penny just meant that children's BMI is calculated in centiles (it is on the NHS one anyway) rather than a number which is why they have separate calculators for children.

I did have people coming over all concerned for me when I managed to get it down to 23
It's frustrating how warped people's perceptions of "normal" and "healthy" actually are, isn't it? I have a BMI of 20 and face a constant barrage of "concern" from family members. Despite me being a 36 year old mother of 2 my mum is still convinced that I'm incapable of feeding myself properly!

MrsFrumble
Indeed : that is why I linked to this one nccd.cdc.gov/dnpabmi/Calculator.aspx

And Y Y Y to distorted views of what a healthy weight is.

If I go into my local Sainsbury's I feel like a stick insect.
If I go into Waitrose in Winchester I feel like a hippo !

Thanks for the reassurance. My main aim is for all my children to have a healthy balanced relationship with food as the foundation to anything else!

I agree on the adult BMI thing. I went from around BMI 34 to 25 before getting pregnant, and I am small-framed with weight carried around my middle, so have some way to go before I'm a really healthy weight. Still I was getting people telling me I needed to stop, that I was looking too thin etc. I was a size 14 so not exactly fading away!

shedding
not sure what to change but I am not in denial
The simplest thing - that can be done in almost invisible steps - is cutting right down on all snacks and reduce sugar.
Just forget to buy the snacks / sugary stuff - drinks and food.
If she's hungry she'll munch whatever there is, even carrots!
If she's not then she'll eat well at meal times.

How strange that the nurse obviously wasn't using the NHS calculator! You'd think NHS employees would be obliged to use their resources.

I think the NHS one does show what the "healthy range" is, doesn't it?

shedding
Also she loves carbs and I do love to serve in big bowls and let them help themselves.
sadly that is your answer : start to serve onto plates and creep her carb portions down and her protein up

My son is 13 and the size of an adult. He is 5ft8 tall and weighs 10 stone. If I put those details into the nhs bmi calculator he shows at being at the top end (90th centile) if I put those details in without the age it says he is bang on target with a bmi of 20.
He is tall and lean with an expected final height of 6ft 5 so I am not concerned but I don't worry about the results shown for a 13 year old!

What I find remarkable is that the OP still refuses to disclose her DS's weight/height. If he was truly just fine and the paed felt so, too... well, figure it out for yourself.

DSs BMI was all over the book as a child, sometimes underweight going by BMI (doing too much sport) and sometimes too heavy (building muscle from sport). He was tall and correspondingly heavier (heavy side of normal on the charts) as a toddler and going into young childhood. By about age 9 that had sloped off though and he was much more average. At nearly 19 he is naturally a very good size height/weight and is a few inches taller than his parents.

If your child is eating well, plenty of veggies and healthy food and doesn't drink juice and eat a bunch of refined food and has plenty of opportunity for outside play or exercise every day then I wouldn't worry too much for the time being.

I did have a rather bizarre experience at DD's 2 year check. The HV measured and weighed her, and then put the results on to her red book charts. She had her weight at 91th and her height around 50th, which would have made her quite chubby, I'd have thought. She just said 'hmm, you can't tell by looking' and shrugged. My husband pointed out she'd knocked 12cm off DD's measured height when she'd entered it into the book, and her actual height was just beyond the 100th. She was completely unconcerned about it.

Looking at the Gloops, they both look overweight. The 70s gloop has chubby knees and a jowly face.

Looking at the charts though, DS dipped down to a 14 BMI during primary school and it really was too low for him. He was swimming for 2-4 hours a day 4-5 days a week and it was not enough for him. We fed him up with healthy fats such as nuts and avocados in very high calorie smoothies and got him up to about a 16 and he looked a lot better. You could still see all his bones sticking out in various places but he looked a lot healthier.

DS#2 has a naturally much leaner frame and less muscle, he is more wiry and can have less weight on him than his brother and look right. I never had to worry about keeping the weight on him like his brother.

DS#2 did get a bit pudgy right before he started puberty though, but slimmed back out as he started to grow.

Stop expecting the BMI calculator to be a precise, tailored measurement of an individual's body. It was never meant to be, it is a crude measurement that indicates more often than not when someone is overweight. Somebody inevitably trots out the "bodybuilder" example as supposed "proof" that BMI measurements are rubbish. This always makes me laugh! In a random sample of 1000 people how many do you realistically think will turn out to be bodybuilders? For the general population BMI is a crude measurement tool that is roughly on point.

OP don't worry, you had a neutral third party (your GP) confirm that your DS is in proportion. That's important considering that studies have shown that parents often misjudge their own children's size and tend to think their children are smaller than they are, which is part of the obesity problem.

OP I haven't time to read every post but if you are still around, have you looked at the amount of sugar in those cereal bars? It is most likely to be 35 % or more.

Low sugar is defined as 5% or lower in a product.

he ought not to be having biscuits as a snack.

One piece of fruit or a drink of milk is enough and if he eats proper meals 3 x a day snack are not essential anyway.

rainbunny, I am with you on people (deliberately?) misunderstanding the value of the BMI.

For the others, take height as a similar example. Some people are very short, some people are very tall. The number itself isn't very helpful, unless we know the age of the person, how tall their parents are, if they are growing or have stopped growing.

Just because height on its own isn't helpful, it doesn't mean that height is a useless measurement, just as BMI is a useful tool taken in the context of the patient before you.

As for snacks, toddlers do need starchy snacks. There is the strange idea that carbs are bad and evil and unnecessary but they are not. Anything is excess is not good, everything in moderation!

As for snacks, toddlers do need starchy snacks

Why?

It's very recently that anyone had "snacks" between meals - and strangely enough, we now have an obesity problem in the UK. People - including toddlers - are living more sedentary lives and yet we eat more food than ever.

toddlers do need starchy snacks
there is absolutely no evidence for that.

Snacking was invented in the early 1970's by the food industry to sell more product.
It never, ever had anything to do with dietary needs.

Google " The men who made us fat", 3 part series, should still be on YouTube or Vimeo, super sizing portions, food additives, corn syrup in particular, and marketing. Very illuminating programmes.