Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Home RSS
 
 
 

Bigger Isn’t Better

Doctor advises against restrictive diets

November 10, 2011
By SHELLEY HANSON Staff Writer With AP Dispatches , The Intelligencer / Wheeling News-Register

WHEELING - A new study says rapid growth in infants can lead to babies becoming obese later. But a local pediatrician, Dr. Mark Wilson, doesn't believe parents should start putting their 9 and 10-month-olds on diets.

The study titled "Crossing Growth Percentiles in Infancy and Risk of Obesity in Childhood Babies" was published in Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. According to the study, babies who have passed two key milestones on doctors' growth charts face double the risk of being obese at 5 years old, compared with peers who grew more slowly. Rapid growers were also more likely to be obese at 10 years old, and infants whose chart numbers climbed that much during their first 6 months faced the greatest risks.

That kind of rapid growth should be a red flag to doctors, and a sign to parents that babies might be overfed or spending too much time in strollers and not enough crawling around, said pediatrician Dr. Elsie Taveras, the study's lead author and an obesity researcher at Harvard Medical School.

Article Photos

AP Photo
In this photo taken Oct. 3, Dr. Claire McCarthy looks down as an infant’s growth is measured during a check-up at Children’s Hospital Boston.

Contrary to the idea that chubby babies are the picture of health, the study bolsters evidence that "bigger is not better" in infants, she said. But skeptics say not so fast. Babies often grow in spurts and flagging the speediest growers could lead to putting infants on diets - a bad idea that could backfire in the long run, said Dr. Michelle Lampl, director of Emory University's Center for the Study of Human Health.

"It reads like a very handy rule and sounds like it would be very useful - and that's my concern," Lampl said.

The guide would be easy to use to justify feeding infants less and to unfairly label them as fat. It could also prompt feeding patterns that could lead to obesity later, she said.

Wilson, who is the head of pediatrics at Ohio Valley Medical Center and East Ohio Regional Hospital, said the study won't change the way he practices medicine anytime soon. And he doesn't want parents to start putting their infants on restrictive diets.

''As long as the parents are offering them safe and nutritious choices I don't recommend restrictive eating until 2,'' Wilson said.

For example, a 2 year old who is gaining too much weight may need to drink thinner milk or decrease its consumption of sugary fruit juices, he said.

Less TV time and more play time may also be recommended.

''There's a lot of chubby 9 and 10-month-olds. My girls were meatballs at that age, now they're perfect on the growth chart,'' Wilson said.

Wilson attributes the healthy growth of his own children, now ages 6 and 10, to them learning to eat healthy foods at an early age. They choose good foods on their own. For example, one of his daughter's favorite foods is broccoli and the other prefers to drink water instead of juice.

''I see toddlers come in and they take a sip of their parent's Pepsi. ... Those people need intervention,'' Wilson said.

Lampl noted many infants studied crossed at least two key points on growth charts; yet only 12 percent were obese at age 5 and slightly more at age 10. Nationally, about 10 percent of preschool-aged children are obese, versus about 19 percent of those aged 6 to 11.

Lampl and Edward Frongillo, an infant growth specialist at the University of South Carolina, voiced concern in an editorial accompanying the study in the journal Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, released online Monday. They argue that more research is needed to confirm whether the study's recommendation is really a useful way to flag infants for obesity. Taveras said the kind of rapid growth noted in the study should be used to raise awareness about potential risks but is not a reason to put babies on a diet.

''That would be a mess,'' Wilson said of putting infants on a diet. ''The solution would be worse than the problem.''

The study involved 45,000 infants and children younger than age 11 who had routine growth measurements during doctor checkups in the Boston area from 1980 through 2008. Growth charts help pediatricians plot weight, length in babies and height in older kids in relation to other children their same age and sex.

Pediatricians sometimes combine an infant's measures to calculate weight-for-length - the equivalent of body-mass index, or BMI, a height-to-weight ratio used in older children and adults.

The charts are organized into percentiles. For example, infants at the 75th percentile for weight are heavier than 75 percent of their peers.

The study authors used seven major cutoffs on the charts - the 5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th and 95th percentiles - to calculate growth pace. An infant whose weight-for-length jumped from the 19th percentile at 1 month to the 77th at 6 months crossed three major percentiles - the 25th, 50th and 75th - and would be at risk for obesity later in childhood, the authors said.

Larger infants were most at risk for obesity later on, but even smaller babies whose growth crossed at least two percentiles were at greater risk than those who grew more slowly.

About 40 percent of infants crossed at least two percentiles by age 6 months. An analysis of more than one-third of the study children found that 64 percent grew that rapidly by age 2.

Dr. Joanna Lewis, a pediatrician at Advocate Lutheran General Hospital in Park Ridge, Ill., said she supports the idea that infancy is not too young to start thinking about obesity.

 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: