Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Infant feeding

Get advice and support with infant feeding from other users here.

Original poster

Just got 6 month old DD weighed... Help please?

65 replies

CharlotteTheWorryWort · 08/03/2007 17:16

Basically my 6month old DD (born on 11th sept 06) has dropped through the centiles and now seems to be losing weight. She is exclusively breastfed and always has been, sleeps really well (8pm - 7.30am most nights) and naps well in the daytime. She's bright, alert, has plenty of wet and dirty nappies and if I hadnt got her weighed 3 weeks ago I wouldn't have been worried about her in the slightest. Anyway, here are her weights so far -
Birth ------- 3.62 kg (8pds 0oz)
2 weeks -------- 3.68 kg (8pds 2oz)
5 weeks ----- 4.49 kg (9pds 14oz)
7 weeks ----- 4.85 kg (10pds 11oz)
22 weeks ------- 6.04 kg (13pds 5oz)

OP posts:
dadass · 09/03/2007 22:42

If you type gaussian distribution into wikipedia it explains it in depth. Basically it's a bell shaped curve showing how at the extremes of each end of the range ie 2% and 98% centile, are much less common, whereas the most common weights are 40-60th centiles. Badly explained, but all about exponential curves and logorhythms etc I was just saying that I know what I'm talking about! You dont need to know this. But it so easy to make a throw-away comment about a child you will never meet on here. Your HV is good, providing she is ADVISING you about your choices and not ORDERING you. Your child is probably well, and we are debating whether it is worth getting expert advice for unusual loss of rate of growth of DD.

dadass · 09/03/2007 22:50

Basically as top up along with the breast. You can measure volume of milk ingested in any 24hr period, so you've got a definite minimum ingested. If weight is put on at a greater rate, and the only variable changed is the milk you know that it's a supply problem. I mentioned Aptamil, but it's much of a muchness.

Goodasgold · 09/03/2007 22:53

Dadass, this does not explain why aptimil would be useful

dadass · 09/03/2007 22:55

aptamil was an example of a formula feed. To be used as below, really.

Goodasgold · 09/03/2007 23:01

I understand now but do not agree.
I don't believe that measuring how much milk a baby takes is a sign that bm is not working.
The best choice is surely to look at the baby, if she seems well why worry?
We are all different. I really believe in the mother's instinct...especially when bfing
If the mother is not worried why should anybody else be?
I think I have read that all these charts are based on overweight babies anyway. Is this true? How would any of us know?

tiktok · 09/03/2007 23:18

dadass, sorry, but you are nothing like as well-informed as you think you are.....

Why on earth would charlotte's breasts be drying up? And if they were, why on earth would formula solve the problem? Formula would hasten this process - all fine and dandy if Charlotte doesn't want to continue breastfeeding, but she has made it as clear as she possibly can that she wants to carry on.

If there is doubt about her supply and concern about the weight, she should bf more, not less.

dadass · 09/03/2007 23:22

My wife tells me they are based on formula fed babies. But staying on the fifth centile is fine as long as you always are ball park around that centile. It's the change in centile that should warrant a doctors opinion. Mum's instinct is most important. And yes, this could make us have unneccessary worry. If Charlotte didn't know, she would leave it alone, but now she does know, she ought to get advice. The likelihood of anything being wrong is greater with children who reduce their centile like this. Even then, the chance of anything wrong being found is still mega unlikely. I woundn't risk it.

Kif · 09/03/2007 23:25

dadass - did you get your understanding of breastfeeding in the same place as you got your understanding of Gaussian distributions?

Goodasgold · 09/03/2007 23:25

Being wrong like what specific problems?

dadass · 09/03/2007 23:28

I have never said breast feed less. Why on earth are you so confrontational! I am only trying to help. Try and be more constructive. I am willing to learn.
If you disagree with the logic below, please explain.

Flamesparrow · 09/03/2007 23:30

But as i said before - children don't grow at the same rate! Some shoot up at 7, some not til 12... in my son's case he didn't keep shooting at 6 months when his peers did.

Kif · 09/03/2007 23:32

weight is distributed according to the Gaussian. The centiles are a way of mathematically 'eliminating' the Gaussian distribution. Being on the second centile means that in the sample of 100 babies 98 were heavier than you. End of story. It is not a 'worse' centile. You have the same probability of being second centile as any other centile.

'logorhythm' indeed,

Kif · 09/03/2007 23:33

Y'see, that's why the lines in the red book get wider apart with age. They're isoclines along the Gaussian.

percypig · 09/03/2007 23:38

I had this problem too, and like Charlotte I too tried to avoid the HV! DS's weight gain slowed almost as much as your DDs Charlotte, but at all times he was happy, active, reaching developmental milestones 'ahead of schedule' and we weren't worried.

HVs have protocols to follow, which may help some mothers, but can also cause unnecessary anxiety for others. In our case we just kept what we were doing, bfeeding and BLW and his weight gain has recently picked up slightly, but more importantly has levelled out over the past few months. I say more importantly, but actually, I don't think it is always that important - the HV recently commented that the weight centile was the least important of the three. My DH (a GP) had said this all along, another reason we weren't too worried! We were also advised to make an appointment with the GP, all he did was look at the chart briefly, chat and agree with us.

Anyway, back to Charlotte's question - as others have said giving formula is likely to hamper your supply, and will not necessarily even help your daughter gain weight. Well done for bfeeding for 6 months, keep going, and BLW is great (in my opinion!)

dadass · 09/03/2007 23:38

the lines are wider because the babies are bigger, and there is a bigger (variation or varience)range than at birth. there are many less babies on the second centile than on any centile in the middle range. Everything else you said kif is right. The important thing is the change in centile. Not the centile itself.

Kif · 09/03/2007 23:39

The other thing is, the particular study on which the curves were drawn by charting the weight of a certain group of babies at intervals. They did not plot the paths that individual babies took.

You could have had half the babies plumetting down through the centiles and the other half shooting up - but the average would disguise that.

Incidentally the sample group had a range of feeding patterns inc. early weaning - relevant here.

Dadass- we're not out to get you - but you are scaremongering a bit, without the firepower to prove your point.

Goodasgold · 09/03/2007 23:40

Dadass I'm sure you recommended formula,(Aptamil) and you haven't said why it is so worrying that a baby does not continue along the centile.
The centile that is based on a formula fed baby.
I don't think I'm being confrontational, but why make somebody worried about bfing?

Kif · 09/03/2007 23:43

Firstly, 'variance' not 'varience'.

Secondly, you have a 1/100 chance of being on any particular centile

THATS THE DEFINITION OF A CENTILE!

percypig · 09/03/2007 23:43

From what I understand (Which isn't that much to be fair) a SUDDEN drop in centiles which is then sustained can point to a range of developmental problems. The more important centiles as regards such issues are those for length and head circ.

However very few babies follow the centiles exactly, most have wee dips and spurts. In addition to the babies own growth factors such as illness, early weaning, and even how recently they've pooed can make a temporary difference to the curve.

percypig · 09/03/2007 23:44

Sorry for poor punctuation in last post, hope it makes sense!

Kif · 09/03/2007 23:48

The lines getting wider - i meant to say they get wider at the top and bottom end of the scale. That is, the middle centiles are quite close together, but you can clearly see the interval between the 2nd centile and the 0.04th centile even though they are less than 2 centiles apart. This means that the majority of babies - centiles - are within (say) 1 kg of the midpoint of the distribution.

Goodasgold · 09/03/2007 23:51

Kif if you were happy with your baby's development would you really care what centile they were on?

dadass · 09/03/2007 23:52

Yes I suggest formula as a Top Up. You've been good as gold goodasgold. I am suggesting a chat with the GP can further put Charlotte's mind at rest. I think growth charts are just a guide. But they are good at seiving out sick babies. Unfortunately along with the sick babies will be many well ones.

Kif · 09/03/2007 23:57

Gold - I don't like people 'blinding with science', especially when they don't understand it and are just throwing terminology about.

Dadass - if the reason why weight is important is that it is an indicator for a sick baby, then why would you bring in formula milk, when breast milk is known for protective/beneficial properties and is easier to digest?

LucyJu · 09/03/2007 23:58

Who are you, Dadass? A health visitor? Or perhaps you work for Aptamil?
What is the logic behind suggesting a top-up with formula will help? Where do you get the strange idea about milk "drying up" from? And why are you trying to use statistical terminology to confuse people? (I studied statistics at uni and have to say that I have never before heard of the normal distribution referred to as the gausian distribution).
Never done this before, but dare I suggest... tripp trapp