Fertility Friends Support Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I went to my first midwife appointment this morning, but saw a GP as she's on hols.  She was talking to me about Down's and how my risk was higher because of my age (which i knew) and about the nuchal scan, she then said that one of the other factor was height.  Given that i'm 5'11" i said well that could be extra good or extra bad depending on which way round it was.  She said i knew you'd ask me that and i can't remember which way round it is. 

Now i'm not concerned as we've already decided that having come so far we would go ahead with the pregnancy anyway, but was wondering if anyone else has heard this and which way round it is.  I had a quick look on the internet but couldn't find anything, so wondering if she was having a daft moment and curious as to why this is having not heard about it or read it anywhere?

cheers
Kirstie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
327 Posts
I saw your earlier post, and have never heard this before, but have you noticed how everyone is always asking your weight and height, they did at my emergency scan on tues, unless that is to work out your bmi.
Like you that is either good or bad cos im the opposite 5' 1/2 inch.
so if anyone knows the answer im intrigued.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,151 Posts
hi ladies

my friend has recently given birth to a little down syndrome boy - who is gorgeous!  seemingly there is different chances of having a downs baby. her's was a 'random' chance, which is seemingly 1 in 700 chance of happening. so far i havent heard her talk about anything to do with heigh/weight etc. might be worth a look on the down syndrome website?

sorry if this info isnt any use, just thought i would share  :-\

lots of love camly x x x x
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,868 Posts
I have never heard that, don't really see how height can have much to do with it.  Re the weight and height I've only ever had it done at my booking in to work out my BMI and nothing more was said about that
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Had quick squizz on the UK & US websites and couldn't see anything, so a bit of a mystery. 

Perhaps it's like my IVF consultant telling my i couldn't do IVF last month because my day 1 progesterone was too high and then getting pregnant that month natually, they're not always right or sane!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,128 Posts
I've never heard anything like that. Sounds like bunkum to me!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
632 Posts
My friend had a nuchal scan and guessed her weight. She guessed wrongly by about 11lb. When her risk was readjusted with the right weight it made quite a difference to the result. Not sure how that relates to height....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,724 Posts
I've never heard of this before!

You'd think if it was true that you'd notice when you were out and about and saw a child with Down's - that they either had a very tall or very short mum! 

Can't say I've ever noticed this and I have taught a couple of children with Down's.

Maybe it's a bit like when people used to ask about your shoe size and related it to how easy it would be for you to give birth!! (Someone will now tell me this is scientifically proven! ;D ;)

Jess xxx
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,987 Posts
i really think your gp was talking [email protected] with that...

my friend had a down's baby (who too is gorgeous) and i did a lot of research at the time about it so am a bit of an expert now (i was her midwife so was doing it from a professional and friends point of view) and that is not a risk factor... there are different types of downs and 97% of it is just random with the other 3% being more genetic due to chromosomal translocation and neither depend upon how tall you are..

usually height and weight is asked to determine bmi and in serum screening for downs it is so as they can interpret your results in terms of your size (ie a big person may be expected to have highher levels than a smaller as there are more of them.....)

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
It does sound like it doesn't it given that no one else has heard of this, and there are a lot of knowledgable people on this site.  I can't understand what posessed her to say it, not be able to back it up with anything and for no-one else to have heard about it. 

If i get to see her again i will definitely ask her what she was talking about and where she got her info from.
best wishes
Kirstie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
646 Posts
What a very strange thing for her to have said! Definately get her to check her facts. I have done a lot of work with people who have Down Syndrome. Genetic translocation and age are risk factors, I have never heard of maternal height being a factor.

However, I did a quick literature search on this after reading your post, to see where she may have got this from, this is all I found:

Influence of gestational age and maternal height on fetal femur length calculations
Pierce, Hancock, Kovac, Napolitano, Hume, Calhoun
Obstet Gynecol 2001;97:742–6.

This article, if I have understood it correctly, is discussing whether the risk for Down Syndrome as calculated by the length of the femur in the unborn child is a reliable method. The idea of this calculation is that an expected femur length (FL) ratio of 0.91 or less is considered a risk factor for Down syndrome. However,  certain patient characteristics can influence the fetal FL calculations and falsely elevate the expected risk of Down Syndrome. In this case, the paper indicated that if a woman is shorter than average, this method of estimating the risk of Down Syndrome is not reliable at a later gestational age.

You could ask her if this is the article she got her facts from, in which case it seems she has misunderstood or misremembered it. 

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
448 Posts
that sounds totally nuts!! but like Pabboo said, maybe she is thinking of the relation between the baby's femur and Downs.

Our baby's femur is measuring on the small side (25th percentile) so i have done heaps of research on this. (I'm 5'4" and DH is 5'11", so we're fairly normal ourselves)

It's actually not considered a great marker though on its own anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Thanks Pabboo, that does make some sense, if they're using an average maternal height they would have to adjust the femur length ratio in relation to the maternal height.  But as you say that doesn't mean it's affected by maternal height, perhaps she has just misread/remembered something - i'll report back if i see her again.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top