Girls beginning puberty almost a year earlier than in 1970s

[stumbledin]

Not sure I understand what the article is saying, and wonder how far back records go ie has it gone back and forward over the centuries.

Anyway posting in case anyone is interested.

www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/10/girls-puberty-year-earlier

BMI and puberty have often been linked.

Current thinking is that higher BMI leads to earlier puberty
pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/121/Supplement_3/S208.full.pdf?download=true

My DD and her best friend started their periods in the end of year 5.
Friend was over weight but DD was not but tall for her age .I think I was 12 when I started.Dd certainly had the start of breasts and hair when she was almost 10.
I'm not sure what the underlying reasons apart from BMI are at play but in secondary school all the girls wore bras and most of them had a reason to.We were still in vests at that age.

A few years ago I was looking for a book on puberty for my daughter, and was looking at some reviews of one of the better known ones. It turned out the authors had recently produced a new version for younger girls, who increasingly needed some of the information, but weren't ready for a lot of the material directed at teens in the original.

The BMI thing seems plausible to me, too. I find it almost shocking looking at old photos of people at the beach, say in the 50s, how different the body shapes are overall.

Back in the 1960’s, when I reached adolescence, there were always one or two girls at primary school who had started periods at 10. They tended to be the overweight ones, so the BMI theory may be correct. It’s logical that a female needs to reach a critical body weight and fat reserve to sustain a pregnancy, and it’s known that anorexia causes amenorrhea.

I’m surprised it’s only a year - most year 7s tend to look quite mature, IME. When I was at school (1990s) starting periods tended be be something that happened in year 7-8; it now seems to be 6-7.

I'm unconvinced it's BMI alone. We are adding a lot of growth hormones to food now; we eat sythensised hormones (soya being one of them); and plastics, when they come into contact with fat, mimic oestrogens.

Article says this is the onset of development of breast tissue, and not menarche which has always been a mean average of 14yrs 2mnths on a normal distribution curve.

I read years ago it was linked to nutrition.

I was told as a preteen that periods only start once you hit 7.5 stone and mine did.

I think the earlier age is due to all the hormones in meat. Essentially a lot of children are taking growth hormones in the form of chicken etc.

I was told as a preteen that periods only start once you hit 7.5 stone

AKA 48kg, the magic number, the minimum weight needed to begin a pregnancy and sustain it to full term.

It's not necessarily because people are unhealthier - maybe the opposite? Kids now have better nutrition and therefore weigh more - again that is not necessarily a bad thing! I'm not talking about obesity just being stronger.

I started at 10 In 1978, dd1 started at 10, dd2 at 9 And dd3 at 9. All between 75 And 99 for height but weight on proportion.

I think the earlier age is due to all the hormones in meat.

Any evidence for that?
I realise an anecdote isn't data, but DD has never eaten meat and started at 12.

Kids now have better nutrition

Yes, that's what I hinted at above. Malnourishement doesn't help periods. Better nourishment leads to starting younger.

I started my periods when I was ten in the mid seventies. I was very skinny but the tallest in my year. My daughter started at nearly 13 and whilst she was skinny, she wasn't as skinny as I had been.

I was 14 when I started in 1980. Dd - no BMI issues was 11. Last year.

My DD was 10 she is tall for age but well inside healthy weight range, I was 12 but my mother was 11 back in 1958, she says there were girls that started at primary school but most were in secondary

maybe the opposite? Kids now have better nutrition and therefore weigh more - again that is not necessarily a bad thing

Do they? I mean food is more readily available but alot is also utter shit. Mass produced, fatty, salty, or flavourless etc

They have access to more food but is it really as nutritionally rich as it used to be?

Plus alot of kids eat alot of junk. Even those who allear to be a healthy weight can be mal nourished

In the UK, there are no added growth hormones in meat (EU thing). There are in the US. There are of course, naturally occurring hormones in eg milk.

I think average bmi has clearly changed.

On hormone effect of different foods:

There aren't any added hormones in uk meat.

From a personal perspective as I'm near menopause I can say the food that obviously stimulates my fading female hormones are all plant based! Soy and chia are obvious.

There are also differences between different ethnic groups - with those of South Asian and North African descent starting puberty earlier. It would be interesting to see if the change in demographic make up of our population was accounted for in this study.

Bmi wouldn't have to be an issue as such for it to impact maturation. I started periods late but maybe it was because i was very slim in a way that would be fairly remarkable nowadays? Today's equivalent of me, nonsporty kid with a normal appetite would be heavier but no doubt slim in their class.

Wow. You all started early. I think I was 15 or 16 before I started my periods and didn't have breasts until I was 17 or 18.

I used to get called 'sonny' by older men and manfred at school. (I also had short hair)

I'm 42 now.

BMI for sure. Food is so available now and in huge quantities too. I wonder if it is body fat % as opposed to weight though that is critical?

@SciFiScream I was 16, I was always really skinny!

@JustAnouk your username makes me wonder if you are my cousin...

That would be weird/funny!

I was always really skinny too...