Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Pregnancy

Talk about every stage of pregnancy, from early symptoms to preparing for birth.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

WHY are babies getting bigger?!

38 replies

mersmam · 14/02/2009 18:17

I've heard a lot of midwives saying that babies are getting bigger, and anecdotal evidence seems to support this.I was speaking to a midwife last week who said that she thinks the average baby she delivers is about a pound bigger than the average baby of 10 years ago. I'm really interested to know why this is the case. I presume it's mainly beeter nutrition - but is nutrition really that much better now than it was 10 years ago???
I'm particularly interested to know because I'm expecting my 4th dc and my third was rather on the large side... I'd love to know if there's anything 'healthy' (ie. not starting smoking!) I can do to keep my baby a 'reasonable size' (anything under 9lbs would be good!)
I'm slim normally (only about 8- 8.5 stones and 5foot6) - I eat fairly normally during my pregnancies and have usually put on around 2- 2.5 stones (and normally lost it again within a few months of breastfeeding) - so I don't think that putting on too much weight through eating too much is what is making my babies big(in my case anyway!. My husband is not particularly tall...
Any other ideas or knowledge of research to show what makes a baby big??

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

MsG · 14/02/2009 19:14

Not sure, but my midwife said the amount of weight a woman puts on in pregnancy is no indicator of the size the baby will be. x

CookieMonster2 · 14/02/2009 22:08

Not sure if there is any truth in this, but I have heard that the older the mother the larger the baby, and people are generally leaving it later to have children that they have done in the past.

Nekabu · 15/02/2009 08:20

CookieMonster2, everyone medical has been telling me that if you're older then your baby is usually smaller. Now I wouldn't mind that a bit except for when they've scanned my baby has been bigger than it-should-be-for-the-date and so they've moved the conception date back. This wouldn't be a big issue except for they've already made a huge song and dance about how if I go one second over my due date they'll induce me because older mums have something weird happen to their placenta if they go over their due date (can't remember exactly what it was). I shall see how it goes with my next scan but if they move the conception date back again because it's bigger than they were expecting then I shall have a bit of a sense of humour failure as it seems they cannot accept that the baby may just be a bit bigger than it should be. Smaller they'd be fine with as they keep telling me it will be because of my age but bigger is obviously an issue despite both dh and I being tall.

psychomum5 · 15/02/2009 09:24

because ournutrition is better than ever, and we as mums are healthier than we ever have been in history, plus women are leaving pregnancies later and so their bodies are better able to 'grow' a baby.............in the past women had babies in their early 20's, and there is now thought that women are actually still growing themsleves in their early 20's and so there is less for the baby.

((hoping the above makes sense)).

I am not medical, but I do read a lot, and my brother is a doctor so I listen to lots too.

kidcreoleandthecoconuts · 15/02/2009 09:29

Psychomum is right. Although it doesnt always follow....my sister was born in 1973 and weighed in at 10lb 2oz! And my mum is 5ft and a size 8 before she was pregnant.
I weighed 9lb 2oz and was the smallest of my mums babies. None of my babies have been near this big! Thank goodness!

psychomum5 · 15/02/2009 09:34

I was a 10lb baby, and born in 1973

my babies were all thankfully smaller aswell, but my midwife had reassured me that it would be the case as normally, babies come pretty much half-way weight between the mum and dad. I was 10lb, DH was 7lb, DD1 was 8lb 8oz!!

SoupDragon · 15/02/2009 09:35

I was a 6lb 11 oz baby quite a few years ago. A nice weight except I was 4 weeks early...

[porker]

belgo · 15/02/2009 09:37

A few reasons:
Better nutrition including pregnancy supplments.
Older women generally have bigger babies.
More overweight women having bigger babies, althougha recent study showed that overweight women are not only more likely to have bigger babies, but also more likely to have underweight babies.
Less women smoking during pregnancy?

ThePgHedgeWitchIsCrankyBeware · 15/02/2009 09:40

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

TigerFeet · 15/02/2009 09:41

I wonder how much of it is due to smoking during pregnancy not being nearly as prevalent as it was? Not sure of the data but I would have thought that 10 years ago more people continued to smoke during pregnancy than do now.

psychomum5 · 15/02/2009 09:41

ah yes belog, that is a very good point.

smoking is now very frowned upon in pregnancy, yet my mum smoked all thru her with me (and did other stuff too......damn miracle I came out, let alone healthy and BIG!).

psychomum5 · 15/02/2009 09:41

sorry, BELGO.

belgo · 15/02/2009 09:44

Also more sugar in our diets? Or at least in my diet

belgo · 15/02/2009 09:45

What I do find very odd though is that my thinnest, healthiest friends seem to have the biggest babies - 9-10 lbs.

SoupDragon · 15/02/2009 09:46

Think how big you would have been had she given up smoking, Psycho!

I can't help thinking my mother was relieved when I was born 4 weeks early.

psychomum5 · 15/02/2009 09:49

yikes, that is very true soupy.

you also would have been a fat bugger tho!!!

SoupDragon · 15/02/2009 09:51

I might have been but we will never know... You, on the other hand....

[snigger]

DS1 was 10lb 1oz though. I did briefly consider taking up smoking when pregnant with D2 and DD.

psychomum5 · 15/02/2009 09:56

how big were DS2 and DD tho??

did you regret not trying??

SoupDragon · 15/02/2009 09:59

DS2 was 8lb 4oz, but he was 2 weeks early so would most likely have been another fat little porker (and the weight was all in bulk not length unfortunately!). DD was bang on time and a petite 8lb 10.5oz

psychomum5 · 15/02/2009 10:01

ooh, so still ver good weights!

dannyg · 15/02/2009 11:06

Hiya i was born 1978 and weighed 2lbs 3oz(very tiny). I had first son at 18 6lb 7
and 2nd son at 28 he was 8lb 6 and I'm now due baby num 3 at 30 and I'm dreading if this ones bigger, My midwife said they generally go up in size

lalalonglegs · 15/02/2009 11:08

Women don't smoke during pregnancy in anything like the numbers they used to.

ThePgHedgeWitchIsCrankyBeware · 15/02/2009 11:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

thisisyesterday · 15/02/2009 11:18

well i'll go against the flow and say that I don't think they are getting bigger.

I think there have always been small babies and big babies... and there still are today.

your body uses up resources for the baby first and mother second, so you would have to be on a really, really, really poor diet I would imagine for it to affect how much your child weighed at birth.

I think it's one of those things where it's been bandied around so then you start noticing the bigger babies, and then it seems like you see more of them.. if that makes sense?

it's largely genetic I believe. I come from a long line of women who have had large babies, and mine are large too.
but I have a coupel of friends who have had 3 or more babies none of whom have been over 6lb.

thisisyesterday · 15/02/2009 11:20

"althougha recent study showed that overweight women are not only more likely to have bigger babies, but also more likely to have underweight babies."

so, one might conclude that overweight women are likely to give birth to a range of different sized babies???

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread