Negative Effects of Ultra Sounds

Negative Effects of Ultra Sounds

Sounding the alarm on hazardous ultrasound - again

It's been a year since I've written anything about this, but
a recent Associated Press article has spurred me to weigh in
again on this traditionally hot-button topic: Prenatal

As you may know, I'm vehemently opposed to this all-too-
common procedure the vast majority of conventional doctors
regard as harmless. Why? Because evidence shows that it can
cause subtle damage to the prenatal brain. In past Daily
Doses and in issues of my newsletter, I've exposed various
bodies of research that point to a causal link between
prenatal ultrasound and:

* Lower birth weights
* Delayed speech development
* Subtle changes in brain chemistry
* False positive diagnosis of brain defects

Also, one large-scale Swedish study showed a link between
ultrasound scanning and left-handedness (believe it or not,
often the result of subtle prenatal brain damage). The study
revealed a 32% greater chance of left-handedness among the
ultrasound group when compared to an un-scanned "control"
group. Need more proof of this correlation? Since 1975,
when doctors started aggressively ultrasound scanning late
in pregnancy (usually to determine the baby's sex), rates of
left-handedness have increased dramatically - especially
among male babies. Look it up.

Yes, there's lot's of evidence out there that ultrasound is
harmful to unborn children. Yet despite the fact that
respected medical journals like the Lancet, The Canadian
Medical Association Journal, and the New England Journal of
Medicine have all written about this topic, the mainstream
has all but ignored the negative evidence.

Even the lethargic, quick-to-turn-the-other-way FDA has
commented on the dangers of ultrasound. According to the AP
story, their position on the technique is this: "Ultrasound
is a form of energy, and even at low levels, laboratory
studies have shown that it can produce physical effects in
tissue, such as jarring vibrations and a rise in
temperature prenatal ultrasounds can't be considered

Remember, non-natal ultrasound is often used to super-heat
and soften damaged muscle tissue after surgery or injuries.
Despite all of this, nearly every conventional doctor out
there continues to grant this sonic bombardment - which can
reach the equivalent of nearly 100 decibels (as loud as a
subway train!) - the thumbs up, and now, it's being made
available to parents AT THE LOCAL MALL. Keep reading

Prenatal "portrait studios"

In upscale suburban shopping malls all across the country,
dozens of unregulated ultrasound centers have opened in just
the past two years. Sporting cute monikers like Fetal Fotos,
Womb with a View, and Prenatal Peek, these boutiques use
even more powerful ultrasound to show expectant
mothers "portraits" of their unborn babies

Not for bona-fide medical diagnostic reasons, but for mere

You read that right: There are a growing number of virtually
unregulated prenatal ultrasound centers out there operating
under the gray umbrella of "non-medical" usage - therefore
dodging the strict regulation that accompanies medical
ultrasound (which still doesn't prevent fetuses from being
damaged, mind you).

For around $200 a session, expectant mothers can take a
break from shopping for maternity clothes at the local mall
and "bond" with their babies using the latest in "4D"
ultrasound technology. Never mind that the folks handling
the sound "gun" might be under-trained - and completely
protected from any medical liability whatsoever.

How do doctors feel about this? According the AP article,
some MDs and medical groups are against it, but many seem to
think it's perfectly harmless. How does the FDA feel about
it? Technically, it's illegal, according to them. And
they're considering action against the studios - including
sending some of these centers a HARSH LETTER or two to make
their point!

Atta' boy, bureaucrats!

According to the FDA, more than 90 problems have been
reported to them specifically with regard to ultrasound
machine use (though not all of them were units designed for
prenatal use). Of these incidents, 63 involved serious

Hope incident number 64 isn't your granddaughter

Guarding my readers (current and future) against mainstream dangers,

William Campbell Douglass II, MD