Community› The Bump Message Boards› Natural Birth
Natural Birth
New Discussion

XP: Interesting blurb in the paper about C-sections and obesity

mizjodimizjodi
in Natural Birth
-->

This is from a fellow board member over in Oct 12. I thought some of you might have some insight into this? :) 

On my ride into work today I came across the following blurb in the newpaper:

"Babies born via Caesarean section may be more likely than those delivered vaginally to become obese children, a new study suggetss.  Researchers in the BMJ Journal Archives of Disease in Childhood analyzed babies' BMI and a measure of body fatness called a skin-fold test when the children were 3 years old.  They found that babies delivered by C-section were about twice as likely to be obese at age 3 than those delivered vaginally.  The kids delivered by C-section were heavier overall and had more body fat, too."

That's all the article said and didnt really give any explanation.  I'm curious and will look into it.  Had anyone heard this before?  Is anyone familiar with the connection?

BabyFruit Ticker boots badgeDaisypath Anniversary tickers <a href="http://s197.photobucket.com/albums/aa308/mizjodi/?action=view
Report Reply to Post

Re: XP: Interesting blurb in the paper about C-sections and obesity

  • judahsmommy1judahsmommy1
    I don't have any more information about it, but my gut says it's hype. C-section/natural wars is big money. I wouldn't put too much`stock in it.
    Report Reply
  • Loading the player...
  • FyreFlyeRushFyreFlyeRush member
    I call BS. Obesity and c sections are up. Plus, there's this trend of delivering a baby that's too big by c section. To me, it's right up there with blaming autism on obesity. I'm sure at some point people will catch the correlation between climate change and obesity. Woman who are obese are more likely to need c sections (not sure why), but it makes sense that an obese woman would raise an obses child due to life style. I doubt it has to do with having a c section. 
    Report Reply
  • RockyMtnMamaRockyMtnMama member

    Here's a more in-depth article on it: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120523200749.htm

    Looks like it might be linked to the flora/bacteria in the baby's digestive tract that are different somehow due to delivery methods?! 

    It looks statistically sound, so maybe when the doc reads possible side-effects to the c-section to the patient, they'll have to add "and increased liklihood of childhood obesity" to those things they throw at you as you're being wheeled into surgery.  [As if the docs every say these things when they say, "It's time to get an emergency c-section, but here are the possible side-affects" like a commercial for Viagra. ;)]

    Two boys already - ages 5 and 3...

    ...baby #3 is here...

    Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker

    Report Reply
  • catsinawindowcatsinawindow member

    I would really, really wonder about the coorelation, causation thing with this study...

    How good were their controls? (Says the scientist in me)


    image

    image

    BFP#2:  EDD 2/11/14, MMC confirmed 7/15/13 (growth stopped at 6 weeks), D&C @ 12 weeks 7/25/13

    Report Reply
  • whitney1170whitney1170 member

    What about the correlation b/w BF and FF and C-sections? C-section mothers are less likely to BF because it can be harder for them. Studies show BF babies tend to have healthier weight through adulthood.

    Also, I still call BS. My brother and I were both c-section babies and I personally had trouble gaining weight. He was normal weight. My sister was a VBAC2 and is the only one of us that struggles with her weight, though not even remotely close to being obese.

    Warning No formatter is installed for the format bbhtml
    Report Reply
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards
"
"