Re: A great article regarding those picky eaters...it will make you feel better!

Stephanie wrote:
"Ericka Kammerer" <eek@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:XOednRWiaKMBCpLanZ2dnUVZ_tuonZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Stephanie wrote:
"Ericka Kammerer" <eek@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:hJednSP_8JuI5ZLanZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Stephanie wrote:
"Akuvikate" <ktelliott@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1192164568.305667.99660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Oct 11, 2:08 pm, "Stephanie" <h...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The one thing I wonder, is do peds say anythign when a child is on the low
end of the growth chart for weight if the child is growing?
Not really. The caveat being that you have to have enough data points
to know for sure that the child is off the charts but following the
curve well, rather than off the charts and drifting farther
downwards.

I am saying that having an average chart at all is a stupid way to measure the child's wellbeing. Why compare him to all the *other* kids. If he is growing, he is growing. If he is growing up more than out so much the better.
Because there *are* limits to that sort of thing!
Is it ok if your child is growing steadily but is obese? Is it
ok if your child is growing, but at such a slow rate that
she's steadily falling further and further off a normal growth
curve? Having a reference standard allows some abnormal
conditions to be detected in time to react. That doesn't
mean that every minor deviation from the mean is cause for
concern, but I can certainly see some vale in having a
reference standard.
So chart progress against oneself.
Like I said...how does that help? Kid is gaining weight
every year. How do you know if the child is obese if you don't
have any reference standard?


You are joking, right? Body fat percent is a good way to start. Comparing to averages does not make much sense.

Of course I'm not joking. Even if you measured body fat
percentage, you'd be comparing to a reference standard to determine
if it were normal, underweight, or overweight. One can quibble
about what to measure or where to draw the boundaries, but
it's fundamentally about taking one or more measurements and
determining whether they are within acceptable bounds. There
isn't any such thing as a way to determine whether there's a
problem without reference to some external standard.

It's not like *any* growth is ok,
or the only bad situation is failure to grow at all, or even
that weight loss is unacceptable. You can't know without
reference to a standard. Weight loss is OK if you started
with a kid who was obese. (And how did you know he was obese?
You looked at a reference standard, whether it's BMI or weight
or whatever was most appropriate.)

Ok I would prefer an "approriate" standard to an inappropriate one.

Now that's a different argument. I agree that it's
important to measure the right thing. That said, since BMI
is determined by weight and height, using weight and height
are not horrible proxies (and most caregivers I've encountered
lately are tracking all three, or look at BMI whenever there's
a significant concern about over/underweight).

Best wishes,
Ericka
.

Relevant Pages
Loading