Study says preschoolers are overweight...

MommyToAshley wrote: http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/12/28/fat.p...s.ap/index.html

This study just makes me mad. Now we are focusing on our preschoolers weight??? Unless the child is fed nothing but junk, never get excercise, and is obese, then this study is ridiculous in my opinion. Many kids still have their "baby" fat at this age. Ashley is in the 97%ile for her age (height and weight) and she still has a bit of a toddler tummy, but I would never tell her to eat less.

Kentuckychick replied: We've talked a lot about this in our child development classes and I actually had to do a project on this last semester. The problem is that children, even preschool aged children do not eat healthy and get ample exercise anymore and I do believe it should be a concern. When I'm looking at a class of 15 preschoolers in our lab and at least 4 of them are overweight and 3 of them are grossly obese then there's a definite problem. In these circumstances there have been home visits and the general agreement is that it's caused by lifestyle, yes, even at 5!

The problem is our culture. It needs to change. Families need to slow down, encourage good eating habits, exercise more and schools need RECESS!!! Especially now with the huge rise in childhood diabetes.

There have also been studies that show that so called "baby fat" is not healthy, and that children considered overweight even as early as age 3 have an increased likelihood (quite a high one) of having continued obesity issues as the grow.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/05/...in1967478.shtml

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art...rticlekey=63921

This isn't saying that all parents should start freaking out, but the problem is that too many parents don't focus enough on eating healthy and exercising enough when their children are young... I say any parent who does so shouldn't worry too much.

Cece00 replied:
I couldnt agree more.

I dont think ppl need to focus on making sure their child is THIN as a preschooler, but rather that they are eating HEALTHY, and getting enough activity in their lives. That is almost always enough to regulate a child's weight.

Childhood obesity is a HUGE problem and I think it really SHOULD be focused on. A child can not control their lifestyle, its up to the parents. I dont think parents should focus on having super lean kids, but its SO important for parents to monitor a child's weight. Focusing on being HEALTHY is not going to cause self esteem issues or eating disorders. A 10 yr old who is so overwight that he has diabetes and heart disease is a BIG problem. IMO, it needs to be focused on even more because the numbers continue to rise. Its scary.

MommyToAshley replied: I am all for eating healthy... if you ask Ashley what her favorite food is, she will tell you that it is chicken and broccoli. But, I guess I just don't see the obese toddlers/preschoolers that the study is talking about???? I think a little toddler tummy is normal and quickly outhgrown. I don't mind focusing on eating healthy and making sure kids go outside to play, but I hate to see us start focusing on weight at age 3.

Hillbilly Housewife replied: Well you probably all know by now that I make a lot of our food by scratch, including breads... and that we don't have junk food around here really. The kids eat really healthy... usually cereal for breakfast, and usually raisin bran, mini wheats or cheerios... occasionally we'll let them have a bowl of fruit loops or corn pops. Lunch is generally a hot lunch, like chicken rice and grean beans for instance. Dinner is usually a hot meal as well, pasta with sauce, or maybe pierogies and porc chops if we had a vegetarian lunch.

The only thing we really limit food wise, is sweets, and fruit juices and milk. The kids HAVE to have a glass of milk during the day, as well as a glass of juice during the day. Other than that, it's water water water. They get their calcium and nutrients from other things.

And Emilie's a chunk...and I don't think kids can get much more active than her.

Hillbilly Housewife replied: After re-reading the article, this sentence jumped out at me:



I'm sorry - but generally low-income families will buy cheaper food, no? At least I'd think so... and what's cheap? Rice, pasta, beans... CARBS. Do those low income families have the means to send their children to all sorts of fun excersize things?

So it would almost be an obvious "well, duh!" to think that lower income families cannot afford "active" fun, other than the risky street-playing that kids tend to do, and without supervision at that since the parents are too busy to supervise, and too poor to afford daycare... and the kids are eating filling higher caloric foods to keep their tummies full...

lisar replied: Well Lexi is in the 95%tile for her height and the 50%tile for her weight. She is tall for her age but normal on her weight. She is thin. But so am I and her sperm donor. Raygen is just short and normal weight. I dont worry about it. Like everyone else said as long as they Healthly.

Celestrina replied: There is a definate difference between a little baby fat and obesity. I've mentioned this several times, but I work at the mall. Santa was right in front of our store so we saw lots of kids every day. It was scary how many fat kids were there. When I say this I AM NOT ACCUSING ANYONE HERE OF THIS, but more parents should be aware of how they are preparing their food. Some will say how much veggies thier kids get, but are they putting any sauces on them? People will frequently put cheese sauce or butter on their the food, especially the veggies.

jem0622 replied: Actually, they do form a lot of habits at an early age. So I don't think that they are doing anything wrong by expressing concern. I must admit that I do and don't watch everything my kids have. Their juice is still very diluted (even my 1st grader). They have smaller, more frequent meals. I am happy with where they are at, and the pediatrician hasn't said anything yet about their weight. We are very keen on keeping them active.

I'm a bit of a pudge, and I do want to encourage the kids to be active and make good food choices.

This is just another story in the milllions of them to tell us about our children's health. I just take a common sense approach.

jcc64 replied: I think it's perfectly acceptable to create a consciousness about healthful eating and living for every member of the family. Parents can be aware of how best to prepare and serve healthy foods, without ever letting the child know they are on a "diet". When kids are this young, we are in the driver's seat- they cannot have access to unhealthy foods unless we serve it to them. Not so once they are older, away from us on a regular basis and have already formed their eating habits. By then, the horse is out of the barn.
I agree that we shouldn't be talking openly about body image and size in front of kids this age- but we can certainly contribute to their overall well being by feeding them properly. Most of us here in the US do eat far too much of the wrong things.

Cece00 replied:
A little toddler tummy isnt a big deal. My own almost 4 yr old still has a bit of one and he is not overweight...

A toddler with rolls and rolls and a GUT (not the same thing as a toddler tummy) and 2 and 3 chins IS a problem.

I've seen overweight toddlers and its NOT pretty. Its very sad, in fact, because those kids are almost 100% destined to be fat FOREVER.

coasterqueen replied:
I totally agree. I know Kylie was a bit pudgy (Dh agreed too) and we started watching what it was she was eating to make sure she was eating healthy food. She still gets foods that are not good for her from time to time, but we watch it. The more we watched it we noticed her last ped appointment she slimmed considerably, except that 'ethopian' tummy look.

Cece00 replied:
You know whats REALLY cheap compared to good food? Fast food. You can feed a kid for like $2 or less

Fast food is a major problem for poorer kids, as its so cheap.

And really, a lot of junk food is cheaper than healthier food...yeah, carbs are kind cheap but you can buy generic junk food for next to nothing, meanwhile a lot of healthier foods (leans meats, fruits/veggies, etc) tend to be more expensive.

But if you want to eat healthy, its possible to do it @ a cost effective price. I dont spend a ton on food but we eat well, and we're a family of 6...I buy some snacks that are slightly 'junky' for the kids but they dont drink hardly any juice, almost always water or milk, and any time they want a 'junky' snack, they have to have something healthy to go along with it (ex. a banana and 2 small cookies, a string cheese and some pb crackers, a piece of candy and an apple)

And really, a park is free...playing in your yard is free...its a matter of taking your kids outside and monitoring what they eat. Its really not that hard and its SO important. A low-income family should place even more importance on this type of situation knowing they are more likely to be at a disadvantage.

coasterqueen replied: I'm not sure if I'd say fast food is just a problem for poor people. I mean, there are a lot of mediocre and rich families that take their kids to fast food places just as much, if not more. I don't think you can classify a 'wealth' class when it comes to fast food. People do it out of convenience and no time.

Even I'm guilty of taking my kids to fast food places, especially when we run lots of errands on the weekend after working all week long. I think there are a lot of people who do so, who just have issues with admitting it.

Cece00 replied:
Oh, no, I dont mean to say JUST poor ppl eat fast food & its JUST a problem for them. I will admit I, too, occasionally eat more than my fair share of it, like you said, for convienence and stuff...sometimes I am just too tired or busy to go & prepare food.

BUT- if you are generally very low income & you are looking to get the most from your money- are you ordering the $5 salad or the $1 cheeseburger??? Probably the cheeseburger.

And if you've got $10 to eat dinner, you can get more fast food than you can healthier foods in most cases unless you feel like getting creative.

And like I said, healthier food is generally more expensive. I could buy 25% more food than I do with my money if I didnt care about how I fed my family. But having overweight kids is unacceptable to me (I would do WHATEVER I had to do to keep my kids from that if it was a problem- overweight kids are SO MUCH MORE at risk to be overweight adults...) so I sacrifice QUANTITY for the QUALITY of the food.

Like, I could spend $5 on a bunch of junk food, or I could buy 2 bags of salad....I'm gonna buy the salad. I could spend $8 on some good meat, or I could buy 3 cases of coke...I'm gonna buy the meat...and of course, the leaner the meat is the more expensive it is....

coasterqueen replied:
I totally agree, but I think even for families who are middle/rich class still do the same at the grocery store. I know now that we buy organic, we can't really afford it, but to do so we've given up a lot of other things because for us it is more important than those other things. BUT I can tell you when I see things in the store cheaper (non-organic) it is so tempting to buy it so I can save that money to go do something else. Not that I'm saying buying non-organic is not healthy BUT my definition of eating healthy is much different than a lot because healthy to me is not all the crap in our foods. Even I don't go completely organic because of the convenience of other foods (even in the grocery store).

I guess I see the debate of what is healthy strange since what is obviously healthy is foods that don't have pesticides, etc in it. The argument as to why most don't eat that is because they can't afford it. Well isn't that the same argument that the "poor" do when it comes to going to fast food restaurants. Does it make them any less or those who shop for salad over a cheeseburger any better? Sure the one who picks the salad is eating health-ier, but not the healthiest they can right? But does that poor person who eats fast food always eat fast food? Or do we just assume they do because it's cheaper? They could be eating lots of canned vegetables? Is that any less healthier than fresh vegetables?

These are all questions that I know are off topic and I probably shouldn't ask, but the whole what is healthier than the next intrigues me.

Nina J replied: I agree with you Dee Dee.

I rarely see an overweight pre-schooler.