My 51 pound three-year-old girl is not overweight, just BIG

[Anonymous]

OP, my older DD has always been really tall and heavy--off the charts for height and between 95th and 99th percentile for weight. She was definitely chubby as a toddler, but her pediatricians felt her height and weight were proportional and didn't encourage any changes to her diet (other than to say we could skip whole milk and go straight to 2%). But I thought that, regardless, it would be good to get her involved in a lot of physical activity. If she did need to slim down, it would help. And if she was just destined to be big, then getting into athletics would be a good idea--both to help her use her body in a positive and empowering way and to help her stay healthy. Since age 3, she has been doing soccer once or twice a week, taking dance classes, swimming, and riding her bike as much as possible. Her school has helped reinforce messages about healthy eating, so she chooses not to eat too many sweets or fatty foods, but she has a healthy appetite. Now, at age 6, she has thinned out quite a bit. She is still strong and muscly, and still quite a bit taller than her classmates, but her BMI is healthy. More importantly, she feels proud of her body. She is a very strong swimmer, and really has a swimmer's build. I hope she will find these physical activities to be enjoyable hobbies throughout her life. Studies have found that girls who participate in sports have higher self esteem (see momsteam.com for some examples). I don't know if her changing body is a result of increased physical activity and healthy eating, or if it would have happened anyway. Friends who haven't seen her in a few years are surprised to see how much thinner she looks.

My point is regardless of whether you think your daughter is overweight, why not get her involved in sports? It can't hurt, and it can help her stay healthy and see her body positively. If she's that big, she may be naturally suited to sports.

[Anonymous]

Oh where, oh where has OP gone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good grief. My DS is three, 50 lbs and 43". He's fat. It's called having tall parents. Gigantism has features beyond being big.

All fixed.

LOL.


Seriously, I always wondered how the parents of the children on Biggest Loser allowed themselves to be that much in denial. Now, I get it.

ADD to it that no one trusts the scientific evidence and facts. It's just nuts.

[Anonymous]

My 3 year old is 30 lbs. We eat healthy and exercise frequently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My 3 year old is 30 lbs. We eat healthy and exercise frequently.

How tall is your three-year-old?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh where, oh where has OP gone?

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's the thing. A child who is 95%ile for height isn't supposed to be 95%ile for weight. That's not the way it works. If you think it is, discuss it with your Ped and they will explain.

95% for weight is almost always overweight. 95%ile for height is just tall. My three kids in the 90+%ile for height all have different body types, different skeletons, builds, etc. None of them have ever been over 75%ILE for weight after a year and you would never think they were too thin.

Well, my ped would (and has) disagree. As did the one before. Being 95% for height AND weight does not necessarily equate to being overweight. It could. But it doesn't have to.

+1 - My DS is 99th percentile for height and weight. Ped said he would be concerned if he was a lower percentile for height and 99th percentile for weight, but that DS is very tall for his age and his weight is proportional. By your logic, only children who are over the 95th percentile are overweight, which is ridiculous. What about the kids who are 50th percentile for height and 75th percentile for weight? They are fine?

[Anonymous]

My 4 1/2 yo is 42" and weighs 33 lb. She's slender and has a smaller frame, but is far from skinny. I can't imagine her at 20 lb. more, even with a bigger bone structure...

I know that BMI can be off sometimes, like in the case of very muscular people where they don't have a lot of body fat but their weight is higher for their height because of muscle mass. But I can't imagine that being the case with a preschool child.

If you're still following this thread, OP, it's probably worth it to at least visit a pediatric nutritionist or dietician to make sure that the best foundation possible is laid for her health. Good luck!

[Anonymous]

51lb and 42" tall is overweight.

My five year old is 42 inches tall. He weighs less than 40lbs and he's not particularly thin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:51 lbs for that height is too much. I have a tall, big child who is muscular and big bones--who weighed a lot less at that height.

Sounds like you've got two things going. Yes, a tall big child but also one who may already be developing a weight problem while you deny it.

What is this with calling kids, kids under the age of 5 "muscular". They are NOT muscular. Kids CANNOT be muscular -- not until beyond puberty. Is this just a failure to acknowledge that your kid is overweight?

[Anonymous]

I understand there are genuinely big kids who look quite big for their age and at the same time, they eat healthy, they play sports, and are generally active. What bothers me is when I see a big kid eating huge portions and their parents think it's normal. I have a niece like that. She's 2 years younger than my DD who is a big boned girl. Yet while my DD is fine with having one cookie, my niece throws a fit that she can't a whole batch. Her mother thinks it's adorable that she's such a voracious eater.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:51lb and 42" tall is overweight.

My five year old is 42 inches tall. He weighs less than 40lbs and he's not particularly thin.

Agree. My almost 5 year old is 42" and 42 lbs and he is a bit overweight. Add another 9 lbs and he would be obese.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are immigrants from another country. We are a different race than white. It is ridiculous for our kid to be not compared with other kids of the same race.

Are you Samoan or some other Pacific Islander!

is this a Pulp Fiction reference?

"Tony Rocky Horror"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:51lb and 42" tall is overweight.

My five year old is 42 inches tall. He weighs less than 40lbs and he's not particularly thin.

Agree. My almost 5 year old is 42" and 42 lbs and he is a bit overweight. Add another 9 lbs and he would be obese.

So interesting...my five year old is 40 inches and 40 pounds...you can count her ribs and is far from being overweight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:51 lbs for that height is too much. I have a tall, big child who is muscular and big bones--who weighed a lot less at that height.

Sounds like you've got two things going. Yes, a tall big child but also one who may already be developing a weight problem while you deny it.

What is this with calling kids, kids under the age of 5 "muscular". They are NOT muscular. Kids CANNOT be muscular -- not until beyond puberty. Is this just a failure to acknowledge that your kid is overweight?

I don't know. My just 3 year old is 38" and 33 pounds. He looks "muscular." Even our ped commented on it at his physical. He might not have muscle development but he definitely looks muscular. Odd definition on his upper arms and looks like a 6-pack starter. He looks typical but with some definition.