To be horrified the NHS classes 5yo DD as overweight?

[mommathatwearspink]

DD (5) had her school night and weight check at school earlier in the week. Received a letter today saying that she is on the 94th percentile and classes as overweight for her age and height.

Im horrified! She doesn’t look overweight, does gymnastics and swimming each week, doesn’t over eat, treats are limited and I cook healthy meals from scratch most days. What the hell am I doing wrong???

Haven’t read all 22 pages but 5 stone at 5 years of age as one poster said her son was sounds obese to me. I was second tallest in the year and definitely chubby at 10 years old despite swimming, dancing, figure skating and horse riding and weighed 5 stone then! I’d expect a 5 year old to weigh half of that.

No, not only 5 stone but skinny as a twig! However that poster hasn't come back. Average weight for a 5 year old is 3 stone. 2.5 stone is underweight for boy of average height.

I think that the NHS BMI calculator for children becomes a blunt instrument at its extremes. That is that, as far as I can understand, below 2% and above 91% you are automatically classified as under or over weight no matter how short or tall you are.

I think you may be right especially for children who are exceptionally tall. The charts are based on average weight s of thousands of children. However where outliers are concerned, there must have been relatively few children to survey.

I thought BMI was based on a combination of weight and height together. I didn't think it was just weight alone so tall or short children's BMIs are adjusted accordingly.

@MaryPopppins always had same trouble here with my now 12yo DD. Can i point you in the direction of Vertbaudet who do a slim fit. Also Gap do some jeans/ trousers in slim fit. For school trousers you can get slim fit in M&S or size down and they do XXL (that's extra long, not extra large). We also found Boden OK when she was a bit younger (especially crop or ankle length trousers, they usually have an adjustable waist) and some Next clothes can be OK as well.

When she was 7 she was the height of an average 9 YO and the width of a 5 yo. Fortunatlely she has caught up a bit now and is OK for her age width wise, just tall.

Quite a lot of her friends at primary and now high school are what I would consider overweight

I thought BMI was based on a combination of weight and height together. I didn't think it was just weight alone so tall or short children's BMIs are adjusted accordingly.

Yes but BMI % for children is based on percentages of children the same age and height who are that weight. For average height children these have been calculated from thousands of children, for the outlies the numbers are much smaller.

I think the percentages are confusing.
why not give a number like for adult bmi based on which dc are underweight/healthy/overweight/obese range.

If she doesn't look fat then she's not fat. My best friends 2 year old is very short, and is classed as 'obese' ! But she's a little dink not one bit of flab on her. Unless your child actually looks overweight I wouldn't worry.

Why is a percentage confusing? I think it’s about as simple a way as you can get. Most people know percentage ranges from 1-100 which makes it easy to understand.

If she doesn't look fat then she's not fat

As has been said repeatedly on this thread it has been proven that the vast majority of parents of overweight children are unable to correctly judge their child’s weight

Jesus 5 stone at 5??? DS is almost 4 and weighs just over 2 stone! I only weigh 8 myself! I'd be very concerned...

A parent friend of ours who is also a GP told me that the data for the BMI charts are based on post-War data and therefore don’t allow for the modern, more muscly child’s/humans body, plus our much more varied nutrition. I queried because we had exactly the same letter about our then 4 year old and he has never had an ounce of fat on him and is extremely muscly and active, so whilst we all need to keep an eye on the amount of sugar and whatnot our kids will shovel in if they can, I binned the letter and gave it little more thought.

You mean it’s based on when children ate a well balanced healthy diet and got lots of exercise. I don’t think changing the figures to reflect us becoming poor eaters and lazier is the answer

@Sirzy but if my friends 2 year old is very slim, wears age 1 clothes, can see her ribs when she stretches & eats very healthily then yes I can say for absolute certain she is not fat thanks. I'm slim myself as are my entire family, so I absolutely know what a fat child looks like. But yes I agree some parents are 'in denial' about their child's weight. Maybe the best port of call would be to book a GP app to be on the safe side. But BMI is not always accurate, a friend of mine is 6ft 5 and a body builder (does comps, strong man etc) and weighs 21st But is solid ripped muscle you couldn't pinch a bit of fat on him- he's classed as obese by BMI.

why not give a number like for adult bmi based on which dc are underweight/healthy/overweight/obese range. The healthy BMI for children is dependent on age and sex. The healthy BMI range for a 5 year old is lower than that for an 11 year old, which is lower than for an adult.

No; I wouldn’t endorse changing figures to allow for that, but it is a shame when families who genuinely do have healthy, active children get this letter, when we can’t deny that modern bodies as a whole are just heavier. Post-war diet wasn’t a total bed of roses nutritionally speaking; one would hope there’s a middle ground to be found.

@Sirzy but if my friends 2 year old is very slim, wears age 1 clothes, can see her ribs when she stretches & eats very healthily

I eat healthily, and you can see my ribs when i stretch.

I am still 2 st overweight.

Ribs should be visible when not stretching.

@northernruth - thanks!

I've not shopped at Vertbaudet since she was a baby. Will check it out.

As previous posters said if she is tall it is fine otherwise have an honest look. Sometimes we think that we are being healthy but things such is fruit juices, butter add so many calories that can tip the balance of calories in v calories out. Don't just dismiss it. There is such a thing as mum gogles

That GP would be incorrect @Battybutty. The charts are based on data from the late 80's for preterm and 4yrs + and 1997-2003 for 0-4yrs.

UK-90 data - preterm and 4+yrs
WHO data - 0-4yrs

That’s interesting I didn’t know that (worryingly neither did he...?!) I am very aware that an awful lot of kids are above a weight that they should be, but also mindful that sometimes the child needs to be looked at as a whole “package” (including frame and muscle levels) rather than points on a chart being applied to numbers 🤷🏻‍♀️

Exactly. And, as has been pointed out so many times already on this thread, the range of 'healthy' BMI levels is so vast that you need to accept a child who is coming up as overweight or obese (we say very overweight so as not to upset parents...) really needs to have their diet and lifestyle properly considered. And it's mainly diet, we all know that weight is generally about what you eat and exercise is about fitness plus a child would have to be doing a lot of exercise for it to have a massive impact on their weight.

Children shouldn't have to stretch to have visible ribs. If they aren't visible when they're standing then they've probably got too much covering them.

@BearRabbitPants a visibly overweight child in today’s society is highy likely morbidly obese. my 2 year old used to be on the heavier side (85% weight for height ) and people kept telling me he was skinny. he most wasn’t although most highstreet trousers were wide on him. our perception of healthy weight in kids is seriously screwed.
we changed family eating patters, and he is now 60th % weight for height.

I'm not sure why people keep mentioning ribs either tbh. I've had clients that are overweight significantly, but have had visible ribs. Your body type, even in children, will play a part in how visible or not they are. Ribs seem to be the new thigh gap in adult women, hopefully this isn't where it's coming from.

And as a general rule of thumb, but again depending on body type, seeing the outline of ribs is fine, being able to see each individual rib is likely not, a little fat covering ribs isn't serious in most cases, a lot of weight would give concerns as it's so close to the heart.