Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 17 of 17
  1. #11
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    .
    Posts
    5,552

    Default

    My first two kids were both 20.5" at birth, but by 18 months, DD1 had dropped down on the height chart to be 40% while DS was 95%+ for height, so yeah, birth length doesn't really seem to mean much. DD2 was 22" at birth and is still off the charts for height at 2 months, so I'm curious to see where she ends up in the mix.
    Allison

    DD1 11/05
    DS 04/08
    DD2 11/11

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portland Metro area (Oregon)
    Posts
    5,339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Green_Tea View Post
    I wonder how dropping in percentiles effects final adult height. When I put DS's 2 year old stats into the calculator, it predicts that he will be 5'10" - which would be a miracle considering how short DH and I are. When I put his 3 year old stats in, they predict his height will be 5'7", which I think is far more likely (though even that's a bit tall based on the gene pool!).
    The most accurate way to know how big they will be as an adult is to wait Realistically, it's easier to tell the closer to puberty they are.

    I'm not really sure where the old wive's tale about their 2yo height vs their 3yo height comes from. As one of my old growth-clinic doctors pointed out, if you ask 20 people (medical and non medical), you will get 20 different ways of guessing adult height... and they are all just as (in-)accurate as the next!

    It can take some kids a while to fall into their curve as well. DD was a BIG girl when she was younger--90% for weight and 75% for height. She's now eating healthy, and is at the 10% for weight, and 25-50% for height (can't remember exactly). There was a chance of her being large (her birth father is 350+lbs and 6'4", and several of his cousins are taller than that), but there was also a fair chance of her being short (her birth mom wears tall shoes to get to 5'). I think DD's fallen into her curve, finally... but, it's taken her heading into 5-8 years old to settle into where we think she's really going to be. In our case, we thought she was going to be a tall one, but looking at her curve now, I think she's going to be an average/shorter gal.

    As long as growth is good, it just takes some kids longer to hit their curve, and to be able to (accurately) predict their height.

    I think we (as a culture), want to know that what we're doing now is the "correct" thing to do, and what better way than to see it on the growth curve.... "Look! Janie is going to be tall and thin! Wow!" or "Yep, that's my Jeffy! He's going to be 6'4"! Quarterback, here we come!" Realistically, their height at birth, or even in the toddler years, doesn't accurately account for what happens when a child becomes in charge of their own health/eating, kwim? Would I have expected my chunky 3yo to be a skinny 8yo who has to wear belts on "slim" jeans? Oh heck no! But, it's who she is now that she's in charge of her eating... She's full, she's not asking for 2nds, and she's a skinny kid. Since I'm giving her healthy foods (well, usually!), I'm okay with her slow-down in growth, since she's still growing, just on healthier foods!
    --Mimi
    Mom to Lala (2004), Bonus Mom to Big Sis 1 (1991) and Big Sis 2 (1992)
    Grammy to Big Kindy Kid (2011), Big Pre-K Kid (2012),
    Grandbaby Appendage (2014), and New Baby Grandboy (summer 2017)

  3. #13
    squimp is offline Diamond level (5000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,048

    Default

    Don't think so. DD was average height at birth but is now in the 98th percentile.

  4. #14
    Simon is offline Ruby level (4000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,266

    Default

    There are too many factors in early childhood (nutrition, for example) that affect adult height to make birthweight a very reliable predictor.

    I have seen the "double your 2-yo's height" idea shared in the medical field. It would make both our kids quite short as adults and I think it likely underestimates where they will end up.
    Ds1 (2006). Ds2 (2010). Ds3 (2012).

  5. #15
    JBaxter's Avatar
    JBaxter is offline Pink Diamond level (15,000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    16,058

    Default

    My oldest ( now 20 ) was my smallest at birth. 7lb 15.5oz and 20.5 in long he is now 6ft1in and a tad over 200lbs. My 2nd is 17yrs was 8lb12oz 21.75 in and is only about 5'10 and 140 ( soaking wet)
    Jeana, Momma to 4 fantastic sons

    Everything happens for a reason, sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,780

    Default

    No, I was a 21 inch, 10 lb newborn and am now a 5'2" adult. Both my kids were around 20-21 inches and neither has a basketball scholarship in their future.
    mommy to DS who is 9
    DD who is 6
    and my girl in heaven

  7. #17
    bcafe is online now Sapphire level (2000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,330

    Default

    Also, I have known plenty of guys that have grown during their college years. So, even going off of the beginning of puberty is not all that accurate. I think the most accurate would be to check everyone around the age of 30 because even checking height later can be wrong. Most people start to shrink!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •