Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

My baby is huge?!

119 replies

Tjsmumma · 11/04/2020 11:01

AIBU - No my baby wasnt big for age
YABU - Yes my baby was big.

My EBF DD is 4 months next week, is 18.8lbs (98th percentile)!

She was 6lb 12oz at birth. She has a head circumference of 42.5 which puts her at 90th percentile and her length of 63cm puts her at 75th percentile.

So on average a big baby all round and quite in proportion, she is in 6-9 month clothes already in most of the bits and pieces and my aunt has a baby whos 6 months whos only just in those clothes!

Now im a bit worried something may infact be wrong or something is wrong with my milk considering she's so big for her age!

Every time shes been weighed shes been around 75th upwards but this is a big jump up!

Am i worrying for no apparent reason or has anyone elses babies nearly tripled their birth weight by 4 months? She never lost any weight in the first five days and put it on, should i not be feeding her on demand etc? Or am i thinking way to much into it?

OP posts:
Sandybval · 12/04/2020 07:47

Why can’t you? Genuinely intrigued, I haven’t got children yet.

As long as you feed on demand you won't overfeed a baby however they are fed. The reason some FF babies are considered to be is because you know how much they are drinking, some people feel the need to ensure they get their recommended oz every day and almost force feed them. Some also add baby rice etc to night time bottles, both of what you can't do with BFing. However, if FFing and you follow babies lead ie when they push the bottle away even if not finished you don't force the rest it's fine. They digest differently too, but follow babies cues and both are okay.

OP DS was 98th centile from birth and all the way through, now he is weaned he would honestly eat and eat. You need to be careful when on solids, plenty of fats and calcium etc, but snacks etc can creep up.

Imapotato · 12/04/2020 07:52

Dd1 was a big baby.
I think she weighed at 7 months what dd2 weighed at 19 months.
She was a chunk, where as dd2 was quite petite.

They are teens now. Dd1 is definitely the slimmer of the two. She very athletic and toned, where as dd2, while no where near fat, has a lot more meat on her. They now weigh the same, but dd1 I about 4 inches taller!

BellsaRinging · 12/04/2020 07:55

Both mine were huge-98/99th percentile and I recall the midwife saying 'you can't over feed a breastfed baby...but are you sure you aren't giving him formula as well?!?' Both were fat babies, looked massive and were always in the next age range's clothes. Didnt look cute, but I was happy because it meant no worries they weren't getting enough to eat, and if they were ill I knew they had some fat laid down!
They are both slim now btw-as soon as they started moving they became more proportionate. One's a slim, fit teen and the other a slim tween.
I always say I had fat happy ugly babies (they were bald and frankly unattractive till they were two) but now they have come into their own and are gorgeous!

SephrinaX · 12/04/2020 07:55

I think as long as they are in proportion it's all fine. If their weight was 99th percentile but their height was like 5th percentile then it might be a concern. Just sounds like she's going to be tall!
My oldest's head was off the chart large at birth (thank god he was a c section 😂) and he was is the 90's for his height. DH family are all large headed! Now he's 2, you don't really notice the big head thing anymore.

TKAAHUARTG · 12/04/2020 07:57

her bladder was physically bigger she could hold on longer than her smaller friend's what does this mean? This is ridiculous. 😂

firstimemamma · 12/04/2020 08:02

You definitely can't over feed a breastfed baby so feed on demand and don't stress.

Almost everyone on this thread agrees with the above and it's also the advice given by health care professionals.

www.nhs.uk/conditions/pregnancy-and-baby/your-breastfeeding-questions/

LGY1 · 12/04/2020 08:09

My baby was similar, 9lbs 10 at birth, then always on 99th centile for weight.
He was in 3-6 clothes for 3 weeks before he grew out of them!!!
The “growth” seemed to peak around 18 months.
He was in 2-3 at that age and then the following winter was still in the same clothes as he had grown and skinned out but now they weren’t too long!
He is now quite tall but skinny, still have chubby legs though at age 2 1/2

LGY1 · 12/04/2020 08:10

*slimmed down!

Booboostwo · 12/04/2020 08:13

The red flag is the height not the weight. Babies that are over the 97th centile for height should be screened for rare endocrinological disorders. It doesn’t mean that all such tall babies will have a medical issue but some will, so it’s worth checking this out. However this doesn’t apply to your baby.

My DD was off the charts for weight, also EBF, and is now at 8yo very tall but also very thin. Now her BMI is on the lower end of normal. Are you or her father tall?

phoenixrosehere · 12/04/2020 08:21

I might be wrong, but I think the growth charts have mostly been compiled using data from bottle-fed babies

Agree. Easier to measure with a bottle-fed babies. At the same time, I think it’s easier to over-feed bottle-fed babies.

As long as baby is following it’s own growth curve I wouldn’t worry.

Booboostwo · 12/04/2020 08:34

I might be wrong, but I think the growth charts have mostly been compiled using data from bottle-fed babies

This is wrong. WHO growth charts are the result of data from breast fed babies from 5 (or 7 I cannot remember) different countries from around the world.

phoenixrosehere · 12/04/2020 08:37

My boys were ebf and both are on the small side and have been since birth. My oldest wears size 2-3 ( most trousers don’t fit his waist and hips and give him diaper butt) at 5 and my youngest 6-9 mo at 2.5. They’re more long than wide but still seemingly small than others their age. My husband and I are naturally slender with long limbs, especially my husband who has more of a swimmers body which seems to be the way the boys are going.

phoenixrosehere · 12/04/2020 08:45

This is wrong. WHO growth charts are the result of data from breast fed babies from 5 (or 7 I cannot remember) different countries from around the world.

How would they measure their intake to get those charts if they’re breastfed since you can’t physically see how much they’re taking in compared to bottle fed.

If you are right, then there are many midwives who shouldn’t be saying it. That’s what I was told every time I had questions with my first concerning his weight from different midwives. They’d ask me how I feed him, and say oh.. he’s fine then.

Original poster
Tjsmumma · 12/04/2020 08:50

@phoenixrosehere no, they are on all babies. Unsure why being able to meausre how much a baby eats woukd make any difference in their height, weight or head circumference..

@BellsaRinging haha shes prettt bald and fat too, but i personally think she's adorable and i suppose that's all that matters! Thank you! I was a fat baby now very tall n slender!

@SephrinaX yup massive head here too! Was off the charts in the womb and 87% at birth and god did i feel it 😂 HV came out and was initially concerned til i explained then she was fine! Shes 85% now for head and 75% for weight and around same for length so think shes in proportion! Just kept being told how abnormal it was an got a bit anxious!

@Booboostwo no shes definitely not off the chart or near for height she's 80% according to red book, i have a genetic connective tissue disorder(EDS and suspected Marfans) and im very tall and slender was hoping she'd be more like her dad whos 5"5 as in the womb her femur was always measuring around 15/25%, perhaps not unfortunately.

OP posts:
phoenixrosehere · 12/04/2020 08:53

Unsure why being able to meausre how much a baby eats woukd make any difference in their height, weight or head circumference..

We look into that for children and adult so why wouldn’t we with babies?

Original poster
Tjsmumma · 12/04/2020 08:53

@phoenixrosehere i think your midwife said that as theres guidance on how much bottle fed babies should eat, so you know DC were eating the correct amount therefore should be gaining appropriately. Just because we cant see how much baby is getting doesnt mean any different to their weight chart.. Surely theres a lot of bf babies out there, so it would be a totally inaccurate chart and would say 'only bottle fed' but it says babies in general.

Everything i read up says both.. kellymom.com/health/growth/growthcharts/

OP posts:
phoenixrosehere · 12/04/2020 08:54

Not the head circumference, but height and weight.

Original poster
Tjsmumma · 12/04/2020 08:55

@phoenixrosehere because its easier to regulate as they get older? Just because a baby is BF they totally disregard them in the data charts? I dont think thats right.

OP posts:
phoenixrosehere · 12/04/2020 08:57

Surely theres a lot of bf babies out there, so it would be a totally inaccurate chart and would say 'only bottle fed' but it says babies in general.

Not necessarily, when you can give breastmilk through a bottle.

Original poster
Tjsmumma · 12/04/2020 08:57

@phoenixrosehere if that was the case there would have to be two in each red book and when they check up. Eberything ive read states that BF babies will follow fhsir own curve on that same chart, like every other baby follows their on curve.

OP posts:
wholelottahistory · 12/04/2020 08:57

Ds was ebf and enormous. The health visitor was convinced I was supplementing with formula and kept trying to catch me out into admitting it.
He is now 10 and athletic and slim.
Dont worry!

Gwynfluff · 12/04/2020 08:57

Interesting about growth charts. I think my red book charts for my 2nd and 3rd were the old ones though.

Original poster
Tjsmumma · 12/04/2020 08:58

@phoenixrosehere so only mums/babies who directly breastfeed shouldnt be included by your thought? That's why they include all babies no matter how fed.

OP posts:
Original poster
Tjsmumma · 12/04/2020 08:59

@Gwynfluff did you have a separate one for bottle or bf then? Ive never seen two different charts for weight apart from 0-2 and 2-5

OP posts:
Sandybval · 12/04/2020 09:01

The WHO growth chart doesnt map out the amount they are eating though? So not being able to measure doesnt matter? Either way, if they are following their curve then it's fine! The formula calculations aren't an exact science, they are a guideline, and people sticking to them too rigidly is part of the reason some can be overfed. You'll find though that HCPs aren't allowed to give support to FF mums, so many do religiously follow them rather than feed on demand and get them weighed regularly. The only thing with formula to be mindful of is when they drop below so many ml you need to supplement with vitamins; but this isn't likely to be until they are nearly one. And BF babies are recommended to supplement with vitamin D from birth and then those same vits from 12 months anyway so it's not that different.