Think Ultrasound For Babies Is Safe? Think Again

  • View

  • Download

Embed Size (px)


Research shows ultrasound populations have a quadrupled perinatal death rate, increased rate


  • Think Ultrasound For Babies Is Safe? Think Again.

    Research shows ultrasound populations have a quadrupled perinatal death rate, increased rates ofbrain damage, dyslexia, speech delays, epilepsy, and learning difficulties.

    Perinatal death rate quadrupled in ultrasound group. (2,475 woman study by Davies et al., 1993);Midwifery Today.

    Ultrasound babies more likely to develop epilepsy and learning difficulties. Ultrasound Abstracts.

    Males babies exposed to two or more ultrasounds were 32% more likely to be lefthanded (which isthought to be caused by brain damage). Ultrasound Abstracts.

    Four hours after ultrasound, cell death doubles and rate of cell division drops by 22% in mammalsand researchers believe results same in humans. Ultrasound Abstracts.

    Risk of miscarriage significantly increased among women who perform ultrasound more than 20hours a week. (Taskinen et al., 1990); Midwifery Today.

    Babies who had serious problems and were ultrasounded died more often than non-ultrasoundedbabies with serious problems. Midwifery Today

    Ultrasounded babies who were growth retarded were three times more likely more likely to beadmitted to ICU than non-ultrasounded babies who were growth restricted. Midwifery Today

    Preterm labor more than doubled in ultrasounded women. (Lorenz et al., 1990); Midwifery Today

    Researchers who developed ultrasound admitted possibility of hazard from ultrasound and said thatit should never, ever be used on babies under three months. Midwifery Today

    Cells exposed to single dose of ultrasound behave abnormally ten generations after insonation. Midwifery Today

    UltrasoundEUR(TM)s gaseous cavitation increases free radical production in amniotic fluid andblood plasma, and provides a likely mechanism for DNA damage. Crum et al (1987); Ellisman et al(1987)

    Even if the above stats donEUR(TM)t give you pause, how about the fact that ultrasound measures100 decibels in utero EUR" thatEUR(TM)s the equivalent of having your infant stand on a subwayplatform as a train comes roaring in and screeches to a halt New Scientist. As one writer notes,if youEUR(TM)ve ever heard of on opera singer breaking a sheet of glass with her voice, that is anexample of what just one slow sound wave can do . . . but ultrasound uses ultra high frequencysound waves which bombard the child at an extremely high rate of speed. New Scientist.

    Perhaps most ironic and compelling is this quote from one of YaleEUR(TM)s MD elite (Dr. KennethTaylor, M.D., Professor of Diagnostic Radiology and Chief of the Ultrasound Section at YaleUniversity School of Medicine) who states: EURoeI would not let anybody get near my

  • infantEUR(TM)s head with a transducer [ultrasound wand] . . .EUR A Prudent Approach toUltrasound Imaging of the Fetus and Newborn by Kenneth Taylor, M.D.

    -Compiled by ICPA 23 November 2008

    Further References:

    Beech, B. Robinson, J. (1996). Ultrasound?Unsound. London: Association for Improvementsin the Maternity Services (AIMS).

    Bolsen, B. (1982). Question of risk still hoversover routine prenatal use of ultrasound. JAMA,247: 2195-2197.

    Donald, I. (1979). Practical Obstetric Problems. (5th ed). London: Lloyd-Luke, Medical Books Ltd.

    Donald, I. (1980). SonarEUR"Its present status in medicine. In A. Jurjak (Ed), Progress in MedicalUltrasound, 1: 001EUR"04. Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica.

    Jahn, A. et al. (1998). Routine screening for intrauterine growth retardation in Germany; lowsensitivity and questionable benefit for diagnosed cases. Acta Ob Gyn Scand, 77: 643EUR"89.

    Lorenz, R.P. et al. (1990, June). Randomised prospective trial comparing ultrasonography and pelvicexamination for preterm labor surveillance. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol, 1603EUR"10.

    Mason, G. and Baillie, C. (1997). Counselling shouldbe provided before parents are told of the presenceof ultrasonographic EUR~soft markersEUR(TM)of fetal abnormality (Letter). BMJ 315:180EUR"81.

    Newnham, J.P. et al. (1991). Effects of frequentultrasound during pregnancy: a randomizedcontrolled trial. The Lancet, 342: 887EUR"90.

    Saari-Kemppainen et al. (1990). Ultrasound screening and perinatal mortality: controlled trial ofsystematic one-stage screening in pregnancy. The Lancet, 336: 387EUR"91.

    Salvesen, K.A. et al. (1992). Routine ultrasonography in utero and school performance at age8EUR"9 years. The Lancet, 339.

    Skari, H. et al. (1998). Consequences of prenatal ultrasound diagnosis: a preliminary report onneonates with congenital malformations. Acta. Ob Gyn Scand, 177: 635EUR"42.

    Tarantal, A.F. et al. (1993). Evaluation of the bioeffects of prenatal ultrasound exposure in the

  • Cynomolgus Macaque (Macaca fascicularis). Chapter III in Developmental and Mematologic Studies,Teratology 47: 159EUR"70.

    Taskinen, H. et al. (1990). Effects of ultrasound, shortwaves, and physical exertion on pregnancyoutcome in physiotherapists. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 44: 196EUR"201.