Sunday, May 25, 2008

He Ain't Heavy?

With the 1-year mark behind us, it is time to update the growth charts to see whether Scott is taking after mom (R) or dad (me). Apparently, mom barely registered on the growth charts for the first few years, always scoring in the lower percentiles. Conversely, I was born later and much larger than average.

According to the 2005 Canadian Community Health Survey cited on Wikpedia, R is actually 0.6 inches (1%) taller than the adult female average. I am 6.5 inches (9.5%) taller than the adult male average. Based on some crude math, we would expect Scott to be about 5.2% taller than average -- if he landed exactly between us. That means that he should be 30.25 inches long at one year and 6.01 feet tall when he's an adult.

(Of course, this methodology is pretty flawed, since it does not explain my own height, or the height of any of my siblings.)



According to the charts, the predicted value underestimated Scott's height. At the 1-year mark, Scott was 31 inches tall, or 7.8% more than average. We will now assume that he will be nearly 6'2" when he is an adult, since these calculations were calculated on the back of a napkin in less than 4 minutes.



We have run out of time and napkins to run similar calculations for his weight, but we know from the chart that Scott's weight seems disproportionately low compared to his height. This seems strange, because we hardly consider him a featherweight. In fact, several people have commented that he is heavier than they expect. With his thick legs and prominent tummy, we assume he should be heavy for his height. Perhaps the following statement from the baby chart website explains the low weight:

Very busy, active children tend to be thinner from using up more calories than those who are content to sit and play quietly. Along with activity is the nutrition of the child. If your infant always carries a bottle or cup of juice with them they may weigh more than the average child from the constant ingestion of sugar in the juice.


If you have ever seen him "walking" around on his knees or his super-sonic crawl, you will understand why he might burn a lot of calories. On the other hand, if you've seen him scarfing down bananas, you would wonder how it is possible to burn through ALL of those calories.

Despite the mysteries, we can safely say that Scott is growing steadily, getting some height from dad and some cuteness from mom.

3 comments:

Unknown said...

You really ought to submit this to some scientific journal. Do you still have the original napkins? Those would be valuable sources.

Michael said...

They say you're approximately half your adult height at age 2, all things remaining equal, so wait a year and you'll have a pretty good idea how tall Scott is going to get.

In the meantime, here is an online calculator for those without napkins.

http://www.kidsgrowth.com/hc/height.cfm

D said...

I used all 3 methods listed on the site Michael provided and they all came up with predicted values between 6'0" and 6'0".

I used my parents' info to predict my own height and methods #1 and #3predict heights just over 5'11", at least 3.5 inches short of my actual height and nearly 2 inches short of the average height of the 4 boys in my family (6'1-1/4").

I think I'll stick with my forecas of 6'2" for Scott.