Obesity linked to birth order, with highest risk in eldest siblings

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis. 

Your position in your family has been linked to a variety of outcomes later in life. It has been found that firstborn kids often grow taller, have a higher IQ and tend to be more conventional leaders. But not everything goes their way. They also tend to be more allergy-prone – and now, it seems – fatter too.

A study of more than 13,000 female sibling pairs in Sweden has found that although eldest girls are born slightly lighter than their second born sisters, they are about 30 percent more likely to be overweight – and 40 percent more likely to be obese – by their mid-twenties.

Because researchers can’t intervene and change someone’s birth order to see how that affects their weight, it’s difficult to confidently draw conclusions about the causes, says co-author Wayne Cutfield from the University of Auckland in New Zealand.

But the findings back up earlier work that found similar effects among men, and a smaller study by Cutfield looking at risk factors in boys and girls that might predispose them to metabolic problems as adults.

He thinks the effect is likely to be biological, and could be down to the inexperienced uteri of the women’s mothers. The blood vessels that supply nutrients to the fetus seem to be slightly thinner in first pregnancies, and that seems to cause firstborns to be slightly lighter than second-born babies, on average. That could mean those babies then overcompensate for their experience in the uterus by eating more.

Read full, original post: Fatter than your siblings? It could be because you’re older

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot 2026-05-26 at 10.15
Viewpoint: Double standard—Why does the wellness industry get a free pass while Big Healthcare is treated as morally suspect?
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-4-2026-11_49_36-AM-2
‘You don’t understand Tolkien’: Skeptic Pope trolls tech giants about the exaggerated, risk-less benefits of AI
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-4-2026-01_27_58-PM
Viewpoint—N.A.D.+: Why Gwenyth Paltrow’s heralded anti-aging supplement doesn’t work
Screenshot-2026-06-03-at-1.24.46-PM
Challenging anti-GMO disinformation: Why genetically-tweaked crops offer bushels of benefits
Screenshot-2026-06-04-at-12.05.08-PM
Cases of brain inflammation surge as U.S. measles pandemic approaches 2000
Screenshot 2025-07-30 at 10.48
Can gene editing eliminate Down syndrome? Scientists have done it in lab-grown cells
ChatGPT Image May 26, 2026, 08_42_17 AM (1)
Viewpoint: Greenpeace and poison: How environmental advocacy groups rely on compliant (and often ignorant) journalists to spread disinformation and spark litigation
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
downsyndrome_compilation_MID_1
CRISPR breakthrough that can remove the chromosome responsible for Down syndrome raises ethical questions
tick-DNA
GLP podcast: Spread meat allergy with gene-edited ticks? Bioethicists pose vile ‘thought experiment’
ChatGPT Image May 26, 2026, 08_21_36 AM
Limiting gender affirming interventions: Trump administration targets Texas even though it already bans youth access

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.