• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

It's a Boy!!!! Royal baby.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
techs said:
I feel sorry for the kid. Life is a struggle. First he has to spend years in school competing against all the other kids. Then he has to find a job. Then he will get laid off or fired. Eventually his job skills will be outdated and then he will have to go back to school. He will constantly worry he hasn't put away enough money for his kids education. He will worry about saving enough for retirement. Tough luck, kid.



Oh, wait.


N/M
Click to expand...

Would you trade places with him if you had the choice?

I ask that question to myself and it's an emphatic "No". Actually, "tough luck, kid" is a pretty accurate statement IMO.
 
Iron Woode said:
I always thought 6lbs was average.
Click to expand...
At 40 weeks, 6 lbs would be considered small for gestational age (below the 10th percentile for weight).

SunnyD said:
My smallest was 9lbs. My biggest was 11lbs.

8lbs is pretty small. :colbert:
Click to expand...
11 lbs is huge, and is considered large for gestational age (above the 90th percentile for weight). At that size, they'd be wondering about things like maternal diabetes, etc. (but it could very well be a perfectly healthy baby).

At 41 weeks, 8 lbs is roughly average, if not a bit on the bigger size.
 
Last edited:
Eug said:
11 lbs is huge, and is considered large for gestational age (above the 90th percentile for weight). At that size, they'd be wondering about things like maternal diabetes, etc. (but it could very well be a perfectly healthy baby).
Click to expand...

My kids are most definitely not normal... :whiste:
 
dennilfloss said:
Wow! Babies are big nowadays. I was considered a big baby in 1957 at 7lb 6 oz.
Click to expand...
Hmm... I don't think that was really true for normal pregnancies even in 1957.

Maybe so amongst your family or whatever esp. if you are Asian. (East Asians have smaller babies on average.)
 
The average weight of a newborn is 7.5lbs, the normal range is 5.5-10lbs. Only about 5% fall outside this range.

All moms usually tend to say they had a big baby or a small baby. In reality, they just had a normal one.
 
My daughter was over 10lbs. She was the biggest baby delivered that day apparently. (I'm not sure if they included babies from diabetic mothers). My son was 9 lbs.
 
yuchai said:
Would you trade places with him if you had the choice?

I ask that question to myself and it's an emphatic "No". Actually, "tough luck, kid" is a pretty accurate statement IMO.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I might. But I would announce on my 18th birthday I would not be King.

Otherwise, at least considering the example the current Queen has set, its an incredible burden and not something I would like to spend my life doing.
 
Eug said:
11 lbs is huge, and is considered large for gestational age (above the 90th percentile for weight). At that size, they'd be wondering about things like maternal diabetes, etc. (but it could very well be a perfectly healthy baby).
Click to expand...

I was 11lbs IIRC. :hmm:

EDIT: lol, I was way off. Asked my mom, and coincidentally I was also 8lbs 6oz, and the heaviest of my siblings.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top