Friday, December 21, 2012

MY BABY!

As you may have gathered, dear readers, I have a high threshold for freaking out.

However, Tatoe had his one-year checkup in November.  (He was 13 months.  Don't even ask.) This is the growth chart the nice doctor showed us.  In case you can't see, it looks like he went from about 60th to 30th percentile for weight. 


















Of course, I was immediately skeptical.  This is the CDC chart, which is great for exclusively bottle-fed infants.  Breastfed babies tend to pack it on at first and then slow down dramatically after 6-9 months.  So, I made a WHO chart, which is based on a more-breastfed population.

















And... he's fine.  Of course he's fine.  He has leg rolls, for goodness' sake.  He eats like a tiny, bald hobbit: seven meals a day, plus snacks.

Data: It keeps you from panic.

5 comments:

  1. With the leg rolls the diagnosis sounds hard to believe in the first place, but cool that you made a chart to prove it anyway!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The doctor was all like 'oh, well, kids slip down sometimes' and I was all like 'LEG ROLLS'. So yes.

      Delete
  2. Thank goodness for data. But disturbing that US exceptionalism exists at the CDC. It's like "we need to talk about your son, because most kids his age are already showing signs of obesity."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, the CDC's charts are based on bottle-fed because something like 90% of infants receive some formula. The last time I looked it up less than 20% were breastfed at all and about 10% exclusively. (I don't remember if 'my kid had a little applesauce last month' counted as exclusive breastfeeding). So the charts are accurate in describing the growth of the average US infant. The bigger question is, of course, whether there is a significant disadvantage to this kind of growth (obesity, hello!) and if the formula companies can or will do anything about it. (Doubtful.)

      It still kind of annoys me that even smart, well-informed doctors (like ours!) know so little about breastfeeding. If 'only' 5% of their patient population had some rare skin disease they'd all be up on *that* but breastfeeding is 'natural' and so they're all ignorant. I suppose to them the percent pathology is what matters, but at least anecdotally, at least half of the women I know have had at least one problem- mastitis, thrush, tongue tie, bad latch, insufficient weight gain, overactive letdown, oversupply.... and so on.

      Delete
  3. I am routinely referring freaked out friends to the WHO chart.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are moderated, so it may take a day or two to show up. Anonymous comments will be deleted.