Does birth length correlate to adult size?

[flashy09]

Are longer/shorter babies (full term) tall/small adults? I come from very small family, but my baby was 20.5 inches and 7.13 bs. Wondering if this means she inherited some height from her 5'11 dad or not. We were all 18-19 inch, 6 lb babies so I tend to think so?

[babyonway]

Not sure about birth but I heard if u double a two year olds height u get their full adult size. Not sure if that is medically accurate of course, but others hopefully will help on ur birth height question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.

[chozen]

Not sure about birth but I heard if u double a two year olds height u get their full adult size. Not sure if that is medically accurate of course, but others hopefully will help on ur birth height question.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.

well if this is true our dd will be 5'10", i am 5'11" and dh is 6'. most of our family is tall.

[arivecchi]

No. It's not an indicator. As PP said, you can get a better sense at 2 yo.

http://www.babycenter.com/child-height-predictor

[roseyloxs]

Not sure about birth but I heard if u double a two year olds height u get their full adult size. Not sure if that is medically accurate of course, but others hopefully will help on ur birth height question.

My grandmother told me the same thing. She even had an old newspaper article with a full chart on how a child's birth height would predict their final height. At 2 they were basically half their height. I think it was like 49% to be exact. I can't remember what percentage they were supposed to be at birth but I think I calculated that my son would be just short of 6' and he was 21" at birth.

I am not sure I know how tall my kids were at 2. Oh well I guess I'll have to wait and find out the old fashioned way.

[lalasmama]

Birth height and birth weight has little input on actual adult height. Birth measurements are based on intra-uterine nutrition and placental functioning.

As others have noted, you can get a better idea as a child grows, and settles into their "curve" on the growth charts. Even those aren't always accurate in predicting adult height though--a early or late bloomer will throw the prediction off.

[Green_Tea]

Even those aren't always accurate in predicting adult height though--a early or late bloomer will throw the prediction off.

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!).

[Indianamom2]

I don't think so.

DD was 20.5 inches at birth. She is 7 yrs. old now and has always been off the charts tall. She is 51.5 inches currently, maybe 52.

Ds was also 20.5 inches at birth. At 2.5 years old, he is barely 35 inches, and that might be stretching it. He is a shrimp in comparison to how his sister grew. If he is 5'8, I'll be surprised.

On the other hand, DD may be 5'11.

[Melbel]

Birth length is correlating with height in our family. Based upon their most recent physicals

DS - 23" at birth, expected to be about 6'3 or 6'4"
DD1 - 21.5" at birth, expected to be 5'9' - 5'10"
DD2 - 19" at birth, and expected to be about 5'6"

[mom2khj]

I was 22" at birth and am only 5'7".

[MommyAllison]

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.

[lalasmama]

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!

[squimp]

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

[Simon]

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.

[JBaxter]

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)

[pb&j]

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.

[bcafe]

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! :p