C-Sections Linked To Childhood Obesity In New Study

There is a really good documentary called the Business of Being Born. It does not mention rates in obesity, but it does talk about the rise in C-sections "designer births" and what possible affects it can cause on society as a whole. I totally recommend it!

Thats a load if shit bc i was born to a c-section & im not obese im average in 125lbs. What makes kids obese is the parents letting their kids eat too much junk food & fast food & not making them eat healthy

or it could be that overweight women are more prone to c-sections

That is an untrue statement…get over yourself

get over myself because I'm overweight? Are you on drugs?

This is nonsense. I had three c sections (different reasons on all 3, first was a footling breach, second I was in preterm labor and he went into distress, third my placenta ruptured). Two of my kids are thin and the last one is of average weight. The last one was given major steroids and lipids at birth so he will always have to watch his weight but it was not because he was born from a c-section!

So your children were not one of the 15.7 percent, congrats, it does not make the study nonsense nor does it make c-sections safer!

I don't believe it. My kids were both c-sections and both are thin. My 19 year old daughter weighs 120 and my almost 15 year old son is only 90 pounds. Obesity comes from the junk kids are fed and being too sedentary,

Kelly Talty C-sections save lives. That is a very important point. And if the infant/mother mortality rate prior to the early 20th century is looked at, the percentage of C-sections done today is not unusual. I object to people coming out with research info that is incomplete that just frightens pregnant women and make them think they should do all they can to avoid a C-section, or pain alleviating meds, or even having their babies in the hospital where they think things that aren't good for them or their baby will be forced on them. I know this study isn't saying that, but there are a lot of groups out there raising unnecessary fears in inexperienced pregnant women.

I think the factor here may be the "C-Section on demand" when labor HAS not already started. The whole chemistry of labor is different than the arbitrary C section done for the convenience factor.

They are confusing correlation with causation. Maybe some of the larger babies born via c-section have a propensity toward heaviness. I had two c-sections. A girl and a boy: girl- normal weight, boy- string bean who eat like a horse and doesn't gain an ounce. I am so grateful for the medical expertise that allowed my children to be born without any of us dying. There has been a long held prejudice that women who don't deliver vaginally are failures at womanhood. Look back before c-sections became regular practice and you will see a whole lot of mothers and children who died in childbirth. Delivering a healthy baby is the objective of labor…. not whether it comes out of a vagina or not. There is a clear, unscientific bias in this writer's article. Don't write about science until you learn something about it.

Kelly Talty In fact, it is safer to have a c-section than a high risk "natural" delivery.

I think this study might count for the children of women who had unnecessary C-sections…if they took the easy road giving birth, perhaps they took the easy road feeding their children. Just a thought.

I had 4 natural deliveries (5lbs11oz, 9lbs4oz, 10lbs3oz and 9lbs2oz) without even so much as a tylenol. My first was a preemie and was breech when I went into labor, the doc was able to turn her around and I was able to deliver without much trouble, I had just turned 18. It can be done. I understand that there are high risk situations and each of them need to be looked at on an individual basis. My sister, a gymnast in her younger years had a bad landing that knocked her pelvis off kilter and caused her first 2 children to be born via c-section. It wasn't until she was planning to get pregnant with her 3rd that her chiropractor found the problem, she went in for adjustments throughout her pregnancy and was determined to deliver naturally…supposedly so high risk not a single doctor would attempt to deliver her forcing her to birth with mid wives at home. In the end she did deliver in the hospital vaginally but only after the doctors agreed to stay out of the room. It can be done. Too many people take the easy way out, including doctors. All surgery is risky and unsafe, albeit necessary at times, still risky and unsafe. @Teena-I feel we need to do a better job of educating ourselves and our children (and elderly adults) about their bodies and advocating for what they want, not their doctors, their parents, their siblings, their partners but they themselves the individual. If I had a quarter for every time I heard 'because my doctor said so' I'd be rich!

I had 4 natural deliveries (5lbs11oz, 9lbs4oz, 10lbs3oz and 9lbs2oz) without even so much as a tylenol. My first was a preemie and was breech when I went into labor, the doc was able to turn her around and I was able to deliver without much trouble, I had just turned 18. It can be done. I understand that there are high risk situations and each of them need to be looked at on an individual basis. My sister, a gymnast in her younger years had a bad landing that knocked her pelvis off kilter and caused her first 2 children to be born via c-section. It wasn't until she was planning to get pregnant with her 3rd that her chiropractor found the problem, she went in for adjustments throughout her pregnancy and was determined to deliver naturally…supposedly so high risk not a single doctor would attempt to deliver her forcing her to birth with mid wives at home. In the end she did deliver in the hospital vaginally but only after the doctors agreed to stay out of the room. It can be done. Too many people take the easy way out, including doctors. All surgery is risky and unsafe, albeit necessary at times, still risky and unsafe. @Teena-I feel we need to do a better job of educating ourselves and our children (and elderly adults) about their bodies and advocating for what they want, not their doctors, their parents, their siblings, their partners but they themselves the individual. If I had a quarter for every time I heard 'because my doctor said so' I'd be rich!

I can't believe you would say a C-section is the "easy road" giving birth. My first was a C-section after 18 hours of back labor. It took six weeks to recover from that operation. Try breastfeeding after a C-section if you want to know about some continued searing pain. My next two kids were regular births, the third one born without a single stitch and I was up and walking around within an hour. I think the C-section was the TOUGHEST one by far.

This is a bunch of BS. My kids were both born C-section and they are thin, whereas a friend delivering naturally at the same time started feeding her kid pudding at 3 months old and that kid got obese. Some people think the fatter a baby is the cuter. Feeding them junk just makes them grow more fat cells and has nothing to do with how they are delivered.

And I totally believe you(that option was presented to me after 37 hours of extremely intense labor as well)! But I'm sure you didn't go into that birth planning on a C-section either. Cesareans are an elected surgery in a lot of hospitals and a good number of expectant mothers plan to give birth by these means not because they had to, but because they thought it would be easier, quicker…less painful. It really gets back to the way our society is moving — that we have quick fixes for things, and that includes how we feed our children too.

Here's the question, did they regulate what all the mothers were feeding their children? Did all of them breast feed, or bottle feed? Did the mothers who had c-sections have gestational diabetes? There are too many factors to consider before you can say definitively that babies who were born by c-section are going to be obese. My son was c-section, he was born at 9 lbs and I had gestational diabetes. Yes, he was a big baby, but I would by no means say he was obese and now he's a perfect weight for his age and height (1 year old, 27 inches, 20 lbs). Plus, publishing something like this is going to make overly weight conscious people refuse a c-section that could save their child's life because they don't want them to be obese. Some of you may think that sounds ridiculous but those are the kind of moms that are putting their 3 month olds on diets because they don't like their baby rolls.

Well, unless if falls within Ruth's personal experience, it couldn't possible of happened to anyone else, LOL! I looked at her FB, those kids aren't thin. Hmmm…

I have heard about some moms who 'elected' to have a second C-section after having one the first time. I think they were choosing that because they were familiar with it. If people think that is easier, quicker or less painful they are just plain wrong. You need your body to take care of that baby after it arrives! The C-section should never be a first choice unless medically necessary in my opinion. These women choosing this for 'designer' reasons is just plain stupid. You don't just jump up after having a C-section and go back to work the next day.

Actually, thin, narrow waisted women are more prone to c-section because their pelvis' are unable to birth the child, it too narrow.

Karen Bloomquist Blume There is no evidence indicating that a c-section is safer for a healthy woman and baby than a natural birth. In FACT there was a recent study by Marian Macdorman et al which said “Neonatal mortality rates were higher among infants delivered by cesarean section than for those delivered vaginally.”
and the reasons being

“One cause which researchers have cited is that vaginal labor and delivery releases a hormone which promotes greater and healthier lung functioning. C-sections on the other hand do not release this hormone. Researchers also stress that the force on the infant during vaginal birth pushes fluid from the lungs and prepares the young child to breathe on their own, another thing c-sections are unable to accomplish. Other causes are associated with possible cuts to the infant during the c-section procedure and delayed time before breast feeding can occur.”

I think human beings are very well equipped to deliver vaginally, we have done it for longer than c-section procedures have existed. If you look at the neonatal moratlity rates with c-section and vaginal delivery, one can see which is more to the baby’s advantage, when there are no other medical complications involved.

Probably both extremes and a bunch of different reasons in between, as well as the fact that doctors get more money for them.

I think a lot of doctors are recommending this procedure because it is easier for them as well. Women just need to be better informed!

Deborah Hoff. You have just shown how little class you have. How dare you insult this woman's family. I too looked at her Facebook and I did not see anyone there that would deserve your bitter and uncalled for response. I also checked out her profile and find the family picture charming. Everyone there looked healthy, not over weight in the least, and an overall beautiful family. Stick to the discussion and stop throwing stones.

I had 4 natural deliveries (5lbs11oz, 9lbs4oz, 10lbs3oz and 9lbs2oz) without even so much as a tylenol. My first was a preemie and was breech when I went into labor, the doc was able to turn her around and I was able to deliver without much trouble, I had just turned 18. It can be done. I understand that there are high risk situations and each of them need to be looked at on an individual basis. My sister, a gymnast in her younger years had a bad landing that knocked her pelvis off kilter and caused her first 2 children to be born via c-section. It wasn't until she was planning to get pregnant with her 3rd that her chiropractor found the problem, she went in for adjustments throughout her pregnancy and was determined to deliver naturally…supposedly so high risk not a single doctor would attempt to deliver her forcing her to birth with mid wives at home. In the end she did deliver in the hospital vaginally but only after the doctors agreed to stay out of the room. It can be done. Too many people take the easy way out, including doctors. All surgery is risky and unsafe, albeit necessary at times, still risky and unsafe.

@Teena-I feel we need to do a better job of educating ourselves and our children (and elderly adults) about their bodies and advocating for what they want, not their doctors, their parents, their siblings, their partners but they themselves the individual. If I had a quarter for every time I heard 'because my doctor said so' I'd be rich!

Huh, how odd, I was going to say agonist the exact same thing about this article.

Teena Tomlinson Shear There are some very legitimate reasons to avoid c-sections and pain meds IF you and your baby are healthy. With a cesarean rate approaching 30% in the USA, it's troubling to think that so many women are going through surgery that may be unnecessary and emotionally damaging. A c-section is also physically damaging. It is a major abdominal surgery. All cesareans involve a wound across the abdomen and the uterus. There is also risk of damage to organs around the uterus, including the possibility of nicking the bowel. Babies can also suffer accidental cuts from cesarean operations.There is a higher risk of blot clots following a c-section than a vaginal birth. Hysterectomy is more common after cesarean. The risk of maternal death is higher. The risk of uterine infection is much higher after a c-section than it is after a vaginal birth. There is usually a longer hospital stay for the mother, and she is at a higher risk of being re-admitted to the hospital later for complications.
The severity and length of pain after a cesarean is much greater than after a vaginal birth. You may feel more pain during a vaginal birth than you would during a cesarean. But shortly after birth most of that pain will be gone (unless you receive intervention such as episiotomy). Pain from cesarean surgery continues on into the early weeks and for some women, months.
There are risks for the baby as well…Babies born by c-section are much more likely to have respiratory problems than babies born by vaginal birth. They are also at much higher risk for developing asthma later in life. Babies who are born by cesarean section may have a harder time breastfeeding. The first nursing session is almost always delayed and it may be harder for the mother and baby to establish the breastfeeding relationship. This is not an insurmountable problem – however the risk of a baby not being breastfed is much higher for cesarean section than for vaginal birth.
There are also risks for future pregnancies. Women who have cesareans suffer from more infertility than women who have vaginal births. This infertility is related directly to the physical effects of the surgery. Women who had c-sections are also less likely to want to become pregnant again. The risks for ectopic (tubal) pregnancy, placenta previa, placenta accreta, and placental abruption are all higher for women who've had cesarean surgery. These conditions can endanger the life of both mother and baby.
Future babies are more at risk for preterm birth and have an increased risk of stillbirth. It is also possible that they may be at risk for more malformations or more nervous system damage while growing in a scarred uterus.
It is also true that a cesarean section can leave you with complex emotions. You may feel angry or you may feel like a failure. You may feel both. You're more likely to develop postpartum depression. Women who have negative birth experiences can even develop post traumatic stress disorder. A cesarean section increases the risk of a negative birth experience. Women who have a c-section can face reduced self-esteem and can have more trouble functioning socially. It's a major surgery that can have long-lasting consequences.

As far as pain relief goes. Epidurals significantly interfere with some of the major hormones of labor and birth, which explains their negative effect on the processes of labor. As the World Health Organization comments, "epidural analgesia is one of the most striking examples of the medicalization of normal birth, transforming a physiological event into a medical procedure."
For example, oxytocin, known as the hormone of love, is also a natural uterotonic"ha substance that causes a woman's uterus to contract in labor. Epidurals lower the mother's release of oxytocin or stop its normal rise during labor. The effect of spinals on oxytocin release is even more marked. Epidurals also obliterate the maternal oxytocin peak that occurs at birth "the highest of a mother's lifetime" which catalyzes the final powerful contractions of labor and helps mother and baby fall in love at first meeting. Another important uterotonic hormone, prostaglandin F2 alpha, is also reduced in women using an epidural.
Beta-endorphin is the stress hormone that builds up in a natural labor to help the laboring woman transcend pain. Beta-endorphin is also associated with the altered state of consciousness that is normal in labor. Being "on another planet" as some describe it, helps the mother-to-be to work instinctively with her body and her baby, often using movement and sounds. Epidurals reduce the laboring woman's release of beta-endorphin. Perhaps the widespread use of epidurals reflects our difficulty with supporting women in this altered state, and our cultural preference for laboring women to be quiet and acquiescent.
Adrenaline and noradrenaline (epinephrine and norepinephrine, collectively known as catecholamines, or CAs) are also released under stressful conditions, and levels naturally increase during an unmedicated labor. At the end of an undisturbed labor, a natural surge in these hormones gives the mother the energy to push her baby out and makes her excited and fully alert at first meeting with her baby. This surge is known as the fetal ejection reflex.

How ever you go though ladies, just make sure you are informed.

Great minds think alike!

It's articles like this that made me horrified at the thought of induction or csection…I was so scared to do anything but natural that i ended up carrying my son a week over…he got an infection in his cord died in my womb two days before the induction i had finally agreed to. I ended up in csection becaues he got stuck in my birth canal…the whole thing was horrifiying and tragic. My next baby they will take at 36 weeks via csection to make sure this doesnt happen again…im not or people just opting for a section but i feel that what these kids EAT is far more important then how they are delivered you are so right! Its good to try and do things the natural way but its time for EVERYONE to stop trying to scare mommas with articles like this that have HUGE gabs in their fact sheets.

Horse manure. People get fat from eating too much.

Didn't even bother to mention some people have c sections due to the baby being to big to be able to deliver them vaginal

Actually, it said the mother's body mass didn't seem to play much of a part. Read the article.

I have had 2 c-sections and will be having another in Sept. I think this study is ridiculous!! My 6 and 3 year old are skinny! My 6 year old is only 40 pounds and my 3 year old is only 29. I think it has to do with parenting and what you feed them!!

I asked my doc candidly why there are so many sections..he said that because of the way insurance is if a woman doesnt go into labor around her due date and something happens because they didnt induce then they can be sued and the insurance goes sky higher…and as most know that the risk of section after a woman has been induced is pretty high once they are on the pit epi roller coaster. He told me franklyy that docs do intervene to much but they are many times put in a postion where they have to avoid a fetal demise at all costs and the risk of fetal issues goes up after 42 weeks. Some docs just want to be in and out but some actually do care .

I had a c section as well, Ayden was almost a 9 lbs baby and now he is in the 95% in all categories.

My baby is tall and lean, I don't think that's a very accurate study hmmm

the us has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the WORLD. And that is proven to be because of the way we birth our children. In most counties they do NOT go to a hospital for births, They have midwives. Also a c section is a last resort and there are many countries where they still train on how to deliver a breach baby. If u ask any of our DR they wouldnt have a clue. Our c section rate is extremely high. Especially if ur getting close to shift change. Do some research, watch some documentaries b4 u talk about things u dont understand. Their many great ones on Netflix.

by regular births do u mean with an epidural?

not sure who your asking=) but to me a regular or natural birth is drug free which is what i had hoped to have but circomstance did not permit.

The epidural was ineffective for me. On my third child, that was a good thing, because the nurses had the attitude that my labor was going to take a long time. When I called them and said the baby was coming, they said, "Don't push. We haven't called your doctor yet." What??? She got there just in time though, and it all went perfectly well. If that epidural had worked, I wouldn't have been able to feel what was going on to tell anybody.

Turns out that generally it is much easier to deliver with out the epidural if possible!

i thought i had no issues from my epi but im realizing now that i do have some back issues..looking back in the long run the lasting effects that epi i never wanted are worse then any from csection!

Now you are probably right about that! Epidurals can cause long term problems from persistent headaches, numbness and tingling in hands, lower back, buttocks and legs, severe backache, and sometimes leads to paralysis!!

Karen Bloomquist Blume Actually, The death rate of women giving birth in the US is worse than in 40 other countries, including nearly all the industrialized countries. And women in America are 5 times more likely to die in childbirth than women in Greece. And at the same time, Nearly a third of all deliveries in the US are by caesarean section, which is a rate twice as high as that recommended by the WHO. Caesareans carry a risk of death three times as high as natural birth. And the CDC says having a C-section triples neonatal death rate. A big theory is that women go in and get Pitocin. Then that causes more extreme contractions for longer periods of time. Then women need epidurals to manage the extreme contractions. which slows down the birth so they give more pitocin and cycle again and then the doctor tells you that the baby is in distress which was brought on by the medical intervention! A big issue is that hospitals are now here to make money and not a place for wellness. They want you to have the baby ASAP so they can fill the bed again. Yes, there are some cases where it is necessary for a c-section/intervention and I am not trying to take away their victories when intervention is necessay, but it should not be at the rate that we are at. Also, If you have an obstetrician, they likely know what they’re doing if you’re having a high risk birth or need a cesarean. But, if you’re planning a normal, natural birth, as in most cases, an obstetrician is not trained in this type of birth and some never even witness a natural birth during medical school!! They are surgeons. They also have a business so obviously they want as many patients as they can get and they also want to minimize litigation so they want to intervene for fear of natal death of natural birth, again, while not being trained in natural birth. It is a never ending circle.

Karen Bloomquist Blume Sorry, I just realized you wrote High Risk Natural Delivery in which case, having an obstetrician near by is good and important. But I think the article is more discussing the rise in elective and coerced c-sections.

For the women who say they were in labor with unaveragely large babies and their bodies could not birth naturally, I think we should also be discussing this rise in birth weight. We hear stories frequently lately of 9+lb babies being born. The foods we eat are so infected with (growth) hormones. Could this be a side effect? We have already noticed the age of puberty in girls becoming younger and younger and there are beliefs that this is due to the hormones in our food. Just an observation…

What a bunch of BS! I have two stick figure children who are c-section babies…..

And VERY healthy!

Total BS! I had to have c section to save my sons life, and he is skinny. Did they even look at what the kids were being fed?!

I've had 3 c sections and all my kids are in the 50% for height and weight

hmmm, i had two c-sections and Bren's not bad, but Riley is off the charts on height and weight. but then again, he needs to eat better.

Lauren Jaye Siegel That was still very informative and unfortunately true!

but Terry you need to look at genetics too……all the guys in my family are tall, some uncles on moms side are tall and broad shouldered, your dad is no midget either……. I think the body mass index needs to be reevaluated, according to it I'm supposedly morbidly obese

I think that what they need to conclude from their study is that maybe some c-sections are performed because of obese babies. Im curious how many c-sections are performed because of the babies size in-utero. I know that alot of moms with large babies are delivered early via c-section.

cam was c-section he is almost 19 and is thin

Congrats! You finding out the sex!?!?

Haha! I have three kids who are all on the bottom percentage for their weight. Oh yeah all c-sections

And you weren't a C-section…

Was Jonathon a C section? Cuz that kid I'd a twig!!!

*is

Congrats ms fertile myrtle

Where have I been? I had no idea you were having another baby. How exciting!!!!!