I'm wondering if weight measurements have changed sometime in the past 100 years

[Elibellamiah]

My mom came across something written by my great grandmother, kind of like a very brief memoir of her marriage, and in it she mentions the birth dates and weights of all of her children (born in the 1920s). They were all between 9 1/2 and 12 1/2 lbs, with 3 out of 5 being 11 1/2 lbs or larger. All born safely at home. I also remember reading in a biography, that Laura Ingall's daughter was 9 1/2 lbs even though she was a tiny woman under 5 ft tall. I was telling a friend about this and she said her grandmother or great grandmother, I don't remember which, was 14 lbs. In trying to research this online, I'm finding multiple posts about large babies born in the past, but nothing about smaller ones, even if I put in something like "great grandmother had 5 lb babies" all I find are posts about great grandmothers having 10+ lb babies. I'm really thinking pound measurements must have changed at some point in the past 80 years or so, but I can't find any proof of it.

[Aerynne]

That's an interesting question.

[sunflowermom]

I'm not sure, but also wondering if our everyday scales are just more accurate now too?

[mamacat]

I a not sure but wouldnt be surprised if women did grow larger babies because of healthier fats and food and eating more robustly because of such active labor intensive lives

[Aerynne]

They also probably didn't induce as much if at all. If there were more 42-weekers, they'd be bigger.

[Hermana Linda]

My grandmother, born in 1911, was 5.5 lbs. Family story is that a neighbor remarked, "Ach! If I bought a 5 and a half pound chicken that looked like that, I'd send it back!"

Sent from my mobile device via Tapatalk

[Leslie]

I've always heard that babies have been getting bigger as our health has improved, and we're eating more bulking-up foods, and that's why hospitals are more necessary for births -- because babies are bigger in our modern era and need more intervention. I've never thought about actually checking the weights of births!

[Aerynne]

Originally Posted by Leslie

I've always heard that babies have been getting bigger as our health has improved, and we're eating more bulking-up foods, and that's why hospitals are more necessary for births -- because babies are bigger in our modern era and need more intervention. I've never thought about actually checking the weights of births!

This would be weird to me because if this were true I wonder why hospitals do so much to prevent babies from coming out (all but forcing moms to lie on their backs, putting them in bed, tying them to monitors, then we wonder why c-section rates are so high).

[SalH]

Our reliance on hospitals isn't about birth weights. It's about perceived safety .agree completely with Aerynne. We have access to safer medicine for when we need it, improving survival rates etc. but we have at the same time over medicalised something that is now perceived not to be safe Without white coats.

I think there are probably a mix of factors, such as induction, diet, maybe a slight inaccuracy in weighing but not to the extent it would be majorly significant.

I had a 10lb baby in a 1 hr 20 labour without an attending midwife because they were too slow to get there. One of my easiest labours. First one was 8 lb 14 with terrible intervention and forced to be on my back and all that junk. I was lucky to miss a c section on that one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Elibellamiah]

Originally Posted by Leslie

I've always heard that babies have been getting bigger as our health has improved, and we're eating more bulking-up foods, and that's why hospitals are more necessary for births -- because babies are bigger in our modern era and need more intervention. I've never thought about actually checking the weights of births!

I've heard this too, as well as women in the past being advised to gain very little weight in order to keep the baby small, because things like poor nutrition caused women's pelvises to be smaller or deformed and more likely to have trouble delivering larger babies.

Here is one quote I found doing a very quick search:

In nineteenth century United States physicians recommended a restricted food intake in pregnancy in an effort to prevent a difficult labor. Obviously there was some logic and anecdotal evidence to support the recommendation – a smaller baby often results in an easier delivery. The problem is that a smaller baby may not equate to a healthy baby. The possible exception where this might help is in cases of macrosomia, often caused by unmanaged maternal diabetes. It is possible that a calorie restricted diet could also improve the blood sugar levels since refined sugar would likely be eliminated in the effort to control weight gain, thereby possibly preventing excessive growth of the infant.

In the first half of the twentieth century we began to see published studies associating weight gain and birth weight. In the 1930s excessive weight gain was seen as a possible sign of swelling and/or impending pre-eclampsia. In an effort to prevent this, it was to recommended that weight gain should not exceed15 pounds (6.8 kg) during pregnancy. As a result studies conducted during this period reported an average weight gain of less than 20 pounds (9.1 kg) and this was also considered good for “preservation of figure”.

---------- Post added at 02:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:58 PM ----------

I also found this quote:
Big babies used to be more common when people had larger families, simply because weight tends to increase with each subsequent baby. In January 2005 in Brazil, Francisca Ramos dos Santos gave birth to an 18lb "giant baby". He was her fifth child. Last year in Siberia, Tatyana Barabanov had a girl who weighed 17lb 5oz. She was a 12th child. According to the Guinness Book of Records the largest baby ever was born in Canada in 1879, weighing 23lb, but died 11 hours after birth. The heaviest surviving baby was born in Italy in 1955 and weighed 22lb 8oz. A 21lb baby was born in Cornwall in 1852 and a boy weighing 20lb 2oz was born in Crewe, Cheshire in 1894.

[MaybeGracie]

This is so interesting. I keep hearing all these alarmist reports about how birth weights are increasing because of our horrible SAD habits of eating, obesity crisis, etc. It makes far more sense to me that birth weights are simply returning to a more typical average after a period of lower birth weights caused by poor nutritional advice that encouraged low-calorie diets.

All four of my babies have been between 8lbs 8oz and 8lbs 11oz, despite being quite small myself. People are always shocked by how "huge" my babies are.

[Aerynne]

My babies weights have varied- 7'14", 9'15", 8'5", 9'9". The girls were lighter, and those are in order of their birth. I gained the most weight with my 8 lb 5 oz baby (about 70-80 lb).

I don't know what babies are "supposed to" weigh, but it makes sense if pelvis is malformed you'd want a smaller baby.

[Leslie]

Originally Posted by MaybeGracie

This is so interesting. I keep hearing all these alarmist reports about how birth weights are increasing because of our horrible SAD habits of eating, obesity crisis, etc.

Yes, this is what I've heard as well. It never even occurred to me to question it!

[Soliloquy]

One thing I know as fact, from talking with my mom and her friends, in the 1960-70s pregnant women were often shamed into near-starvation diets by their obstetricians. My godmother was only allowed to gain TEN POUNDS in her pregnancies and she was thin when she got pregnant. The day she went home from the hospital she weighed 15 lbs less than her pre-pregnancy weight.

My paternal grandmother said her doctor had a fit because she gained 20 lbs in her pregnancy. And my grandmother was underweight when she got pregnant because she had spent the previous year nursing her terminally ill mother. That was 1943.

So if birth weights are increasing compared to THAT, I'm not surprised.

[mommylove]

That is SO sad! I can't imagine being weight shamed on top of all the changes going on in my body during pregnancy. How terrible!!!