Well, okay- not really. I understand the way percentiles work- that theoretically, you can only approach them to infinity, but no one explained that to the computer that calculated and rounded Mia's measurements at her (rather belated) four-month wellness assessment on Friday. Printed on the Health Summary right next to her length, there it was in parentheses: 100%.
While her current weight of 17 lbs, 1 oz puts her in the 86th percentile for weight, her length measurement of 27 inches has apparently knocked her height percentile out of the park. This was particularly impressive to behold considering that Abby was always very big for her age, but somehow never managed to rank quite high enough to confuse the computer in either category. Her weight hovered around 99.8% for awhile, if I remember correctly, but her height fell somewhere between the 97th and 98th percentiles most of the time.
There are a few mitigating factors I should disclose. First, I assume that Mia's stats were calculated based on the measurements of other four-month old girls, and as of yesterday, she was 20 days past four months. Secondly, she was pretty wiggly when the nurse attempted to straighten her legs and I could see that Mia had scooched her way down the exam table by about a quarter of an inch by the time the nurse was able to draw a mark at her heel. Of course, I couldn't see whether her leg was even pulled sufficiently straight to get an accurate reading on that end; for all I know the extra height that was added at the top was effectively subtracted at the bottom. Ultimately, what I took away from all of that was that measuring babies' lengths is far from an exact science.
I can attest that Mia is legitimately quite tall, however. It's been about two weeks now since I had to adjust the jumperoo up a level to suit her. She's solidly filling out 6-9 month clothes and threatening to jump up another size very soon. Most astonishingly, she is rapidly catching up to her older brother in size, though he's 14.5 months her senior. I haven't had a chance to back up my observations with actual numbers, but it's looking to me like there's a greater height difference now between Abigail and Michael than there is between Michael and Amelia.
|Mia in Michael's chair: She's got some catching up to do, but not a whole lot, considering.|
I've joked about it happening here and there, but I'm now realizing it's likely to be true: the day is not so far from us now when Mia and Michael will be mistaken for twins at first glance (as my brother and I were throughout our early childhood). Some years ahead, if Michael's growth pattern is anything like his Uncle Michael's, he'll eventually be assumed the younger sibling of the two (once again, happened with my brother and me). As his uncle can surely tell him, though, it will all work out in the end. It's easy to forget when I see him with his very large sisters, but Michael is pretty well above average size too, and the day will come when he'll likely surpass them both.
He'll probably just need to wait 14 or so years to see it happen, poor guy.