tokimaturi
Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2018
- Messages
- 83
Essentially every expectant mother in developed countries undergoes these procedures without thinking anything of it. Just the name ultrasound makes one think of whales singing in the pristine sea. Turns out it's a form of non-ionizing radiation at a specific frequency the wave pressures of which, if sound, would exceed our pain threshold many a thousand-fold. They've been shown to cause such incredible damage that it's hard to justify either their non-medical or even medical use. And the heritable DNA damage they cause have now potentially been used for up to four consecutive generations in some cases.
I, like many others, had no idea of the damage ultrasound causes and didn't even realise opting out is a thing to consider. Below are a few articles with huge amount of information that I tried to somehow summarize. A single child that has to bear this burden before even stepping into this world is a tragedy. By spreading the word I hope a few can be spared.
Prenatal Ultrasound—Not So Sound After All
"...Despite the absence of demonstrated benefits, there is also a trend toward “new applications of ultrasound…at earlier stages in pregnancy” (p. 47), including Doppler fetal heart rate monitoring that magnifies the unborn baby’s exposure manyfold.
"...two recent books make the opposite case. One author—backed up by over 1500 scientific citations—argues that prenatal ultrasound is so harmful to children that it “should be banned from obstetrics immediately.” The other contends that the “subtle and not-so-subtle” biological effects of ultrasound “have set the human species on a tragic path” from which it may take generations to recover.
"Few prospective parents realize that ultrasound technology is not just sound waves but is based on non-ionizing radiation."
"...In the mid-1980s, a best-selling doctor/author likened ultrasound to other “unproven” technologies “being sold to the public as being ‘perfectly safe’” and scolded the medical profession for failing to take the “necessary steps to protect people against a malignant technology.” Around the same time, the World Health Organization declared (in vain) that concerns about ultrasound’s clinical efficacy and safety “do not allow a recommendation for routine screening.”
"According to the author of one of the recent ultrasound critiques, the technology causes far-reaching damage. Describing a series of studies published in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the author notes that “a single exposure to ultrasound produced cellular and DNA damage similar to 250 chest x rays”—and “[d]amage was permanent and heritable for ten generations and beyond.” Forms of damage included “DNA shearing, single and double strand breaks, chromosome rearrangements and DNA uncoiling, deformities and mutations in offspring, as well as the complete deactivation of genetic material within sonicated cells.”
"The second recent book summarizes 50 studies of prenatal ultrasound in China, describing “alteration and injuries in the organs, tissues [and] cellular ultrastructures” and “damage to the cytokine signaling in molecules, red blood cells, neurons and mitochondria.” The author notes that the physics of ultrasound are “dramatic”; for example, industry uses ultrasound “to disintegrate and blend materials, and to weld steel.” Airing the concept of “toxic synergy,” the book also suggests that “ultrasound is an effective synergist…theoretically capable of initiating fetal vulnerabilities to subsequent toxic exposure”; thus, “the risk of subsequent exposure to vaccines, birth drugs, antibiotics and other environmental stressors would be raised by prenatal ultrasound, not in addition, but as a multiplier”
"...This FDA action ensured that babies born after 1991 would be exposed to even more radiation as compared to those born in the 1970s and 80s, hence these children have a greater risk of radiation-induced genetic and/or brain damage that can lead to autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders.
"Researchers have pointed out that the autism epidemic took off at around the same time that ultrasound use and intensity increased. To explain this association, they note the presence of central nervous system alterations in animals exposed to ultrasound in utero. For example, a study in mice found that fetal exposure to diagnostic ultrasound altered “typical social behaviors…that may be relevant for autism.”
"...Casanova frankly states that “ltrasounds are being done without regards to the safety of the patients.” He points out that a third of all ultrasound practitioners fail to adhere to safety regulations and notes that at least 40% of ultrasound equipment is defective. In addition, he observes that many practitioners “don’t see anything wrong” with using ultrasound during the first trimester, even though safety regulations discourage first-trimester use in uneventful pregnancies. "
Ultrasound Pregnancy Risks
"...Children, and especially developing babies in the womb, are at great risk from exposure to non-ionizing technologies since children's brains and bodies absorb more radiation, and the bone marrow in their head absorbs up to 10x as much radiation as does that of adults.
"In truth, all living things are in danger from exposure to non-ionizing technologies and this includes radiation from cell towers, cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors, wifi devices, and 5G technology which is being introduced. Because these devices are now ubiquitous in our society—and because children are now being exposed 24/7 (even while in the womb)—it is important for parents to understand the facts about non-ionizing technologies so that they can protect themselves and their children from harm.
"...In both human and animal studies, ultrasound exposure in utero has been repeatedly shown to cause intrauterine growth restriction and low birth weight. Medical researchers at the FDA have known about this for decades, with an FDA spokesperson acknowledging in the early 1990s that:
“We’ve been looking at a population of children – about 2,000 children – about half of whom have been irradiated [with ultrasound] in the Denver, Colorado area. And the indication there is that these children who have been irradiated have a reduced birth weight.”
"Despite this knowledge, in 1991, the FDA decided to increase the maximum allowable output levels for obstetrical ultrasound machines at least eightfold, with some sources saying that output levels increased 10 to-15-fold over the next few years.
"...Significantly, both fetal heart monitoring and ultrasound scans have been repeatedly shown to have no benefit in terms of neonatal outcome.
"...Both ultrasound scans and Doppler fetal heart monitors have been repeatedly documented to cause extreme localized temperatures, that can lead to neurological defects, spina bifida, deformations in the head and brain, microcephaly, heart irregularities and defects, and other serious harm.
"Ultrasonically-induced fetal growth retardation (documented in literally dozens of studies as mentioned above) may be due, in part, to restrictions in bone growth caused by bones absorbing excess radiation heat.
“Bone is extremely sensitive to ultrasound heating: the skull of a third-trimester fetus heats up 50 times more quickly than brain tissue when exposed to ultrasound. This means that brain structures lying close to the skull, such as the pituitary and the hypothalamus, are especially at risk of secondary heating.”
"...ultrasound-induced reproductive damage is extremely well-documented, and the medical establishment has known, since at least 1955, that ultrasound can have deleterious effects on the menstrual cycle, decrease ovulation rates, cause problems with embryo implantation, and trigger structural alterations in ovarian and testicular tissue.
",,,The medical establishment is well aware that ultrasound stops sperm production. This is why doctors are currently using it as a form of male contraception.
"Two 15 minute blasts to the adult male scrotum ensures a minimum of six months infertility, and infertility can be permanent. "
Russian Study Confirms Disastrous Genetic Damage from Prenatal Ultrasound
",,,Before using an ultrasound generator, DNA molecules produce sounds over a wide range, from several to hundreds of hertz-Hz. And after using ultrasound, molecules sounded with special emphasis on the same frequency of 10 Hz. This frequency remained the same for several weeks after the experiment and its amplitude was not reduced at all. Figuratively speaking, the diversity of frequencies has been lost in the symphony of life, and one penetrating frequency – tone has prevailed.
"...the most striking was the following result – when they prepared a new DNA preparation and placed it in an old ultrasound-stricken place. Suddenly the specimen began to show all signs as if he had been hit by ultrasound.
"After a series of tests, scientists came to a surprising conclusion. Ultrasound hurt DNA molecules and they remembered it. DNA molecules have experienced a strong shock, after which they have long recovered and eventually created a wave phantom of pain and fear that remained in place for their terrible experiment. Under the influence of this phantom, even the second, new DNA molecule, they experienced a similar shock that left them with the same consequences!
"Further studies have shown that during ultrasound irradiation, double DNA spirals unravel and even tear, as is the case with strong heating of these molecules. At the moment of these mechanical damages, electromagnetic waves are formed that form the phantom. It is able to destroy DNA as well as heat and ultrasound.
"...Using ultrasound can have disastrous consequences for future generations. It is not excluded that ultrasound techniques can be carried out in a targeted manner to damage the genetic potential of humans. "
Germany Bans Prenatal Ultrasound for Non-Medical Use
“The high levels of ultrasound required for imaging are associated with a potential risk to the unborn baby, especially as significantly more sonic energy is absorbed into the bone at the onset of bone formation. In addition, reliable studies on the consequences of this application are lacking […]. Therefore, ultrasound applications are used for a non-medical purpose, e.g.for pure imaging of the fetus (“baby cinema”), without a medical indication was made prohibited […]. “
Ultrasound Risks
"...DUS [diagnostic ultrasound] is not natural sound. It is usually at a frequency of 3 to 9 megahertz with harmonics and random sonic effects. Its fundamental frequencies are higher than the EMF carrier frequencies for the AM radio band. Human hearing range is only 20 to 20,000 hertz. DUS wave pressures can be thousands times that of the hearing pain threshold.
"The physics are dramatic. "Environmental Health Criteria 22: Ultrasound," published in 1982 by The World Health Organization (WHO), states that ultrasound cavitation can create powerful shockwaves far above the speed of sound. It can create cavitational bubble collapse temperatures of thousands of degrees.
"...DUS is widely declared to be "harmless," despite mothers describing on internet forums, such as The Thinking Moms' Revolution, fetal trauma, maternal pain, and events preceding ultrasound-associated damage to their child. Other forums describe vaginal bleeding following DUS.
"...…more than 35 published animal studies suggest that in utero ultrasound exposure can affect prenatal growth… A number of biological effects have been observed following ultrasound exposure in various experimental systems. These include reduction in immune response, change in sister chromatid exchange frequencies, cell death, change in cell membrane functions, degradation of macromolecules, free radical formation, and reduced cell reproductive potential… The data on clinical efficacy and safety do not allow a recommendation for routine screening….
"...Our findings suggested that [five or more ultrasound sessions] increase the proportion of growth-restricted fetuses by about one third. …it would seem prudent to limit ultrasound examinations of the fetus...
"...Stalberg nevertheless finds some increased risk for boys (not girls) in the following categories: schizophrenia, lower intellectual ability, lower performance in school, lower performance in physical education, and a tendency towards left-handedness.
"Stalberg concludes that the increased risks did not reach statistical significance, though with important exceptions.
"Boys exposed to ultrasound at any time during gestation had lower mean grades in physical education and a tendency towards lower school grades in general.
…these studies assessed ultrasound exposure in the 1970 and 1980s, with average intensity output levels for ultrasound machines of around 20 mW/cm2. This is very low compared to the maximum limit of 720 mW/cm2 set by the U.S. FDA… outputs are probably ten times higher today.... Further, the intensities for ultrasound machines are based on the manufacturer's data and high discrepancies have been found....
"...Siegel (1979) observed increased cell detachment at low exposure. This relates to problematic embryo implantation and fetal growth restriction. The study was discussed in the WHO Criteria 22 as a reason to deny routine DUS.
"Cachon (1981) observed damage to cell microtubules with only 10 seconds exposure at low intensity of 8mW/cm2. The study was discussed in the WHO Criteria 22 as a reason to deny routine.
"Ellisman (1987) observed myelination disruption at the extremely low intensity of 0.135mW/cm2. This is a rat pup study emulating the human fetal scenario. No serious discussion followed this essential, devastating study of DUS. Though initially given a high quality rating by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), it was later denied funding for continuation.
"Beverley Beech, of AIMSUK, characterizes the importance of animal studies:
"Over the years there have been numerous studies on rats, mice and monkeys which have found reduced fetal weight in babies... in the monkey studies, the ultrasound babies sat or lay around the bottom of the cage, whereas the little control monkeys were climbing up the bars and were up to the usual monkey tricks... What happens when the monkeys grow up?... as Jean Robinson has pointed out, monkeys do not learn to read, write, multiply, sing opera, or play the violin.
"...During 1991, FDA negotiations among "interested parties" resulted in an 8x15x increase in allowable DUS machine intensities with safety responsibility entirely on the operator.
"...As intensities and disease increased, did the NIH step up, appropriately fund studies? No. The opposite. Only a few studies were conducted after 1991. Most of these studies found ultrasound hazardous but were denied funding for continuance, and/or, their observations were ignored.
"...Worse than inappropriate science is no science. Abramowicz (2013) says:
"…for fetal imaging, the ISPTA was allowed to increase by a factor of almost 16 from 1976 and almost 8 from 1986 to 1992, yet… all epidemiological information available regarding fetal effects predates 1992.
"...The book was published under the title, 50 Human Studies Indicate Extreme Risk for Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography.
"...Unknown to Western scientists and the public, the hazards of ultrasound to the human fetus have been confirmed in China since the late 1980s. This involved approximately 50 human studies, over 100 scientists, and 2,700 pregnant women (maternal-fetal pairs). These women were volunteering for abortion. Before abortion, they were exposed to carefully controlled DUS exposure levels, relevant to the clinical scenario. The studies were conducted over a period of 23 years, with the last, found so far, published in year 2011. These studies analyze abortive matter via electron-microscopy and biochemical assays.
"...The CHS are simple. Pregnant women, volunteering for abortion, were carefully selected and then exposed to controlled ultrasound sessions, using standard clinical devices at various intensity settings and exposure durations. Abortive matter was examined via state-of-the-art technology, e.g., electron microscopy, flow cytometry, and various biochemical analyses (immuno- and histo-). The results were compared against the results of sham-exposed pregnant women (maternal-fetal pairs exposed at zero intensity).
"Chinese scientists measured damage to the fetal brain, kidney, cornea, chorionic villi, and immune system. They determined that low exposure is able to damage the human fetus, ovum, and embryo.
"...J. Zhang (2002) is the amazing electrophoresis study, a human in utero exposure study. The study is unknown and never discussed, like nearly all of the CHS, despite being published in pristine English and in modern scientific format. The study finds DNA fragmentation in the chorionic villi caused by low intensity DUS at only 10 minutes exposure.
"The study's results are so strong that we could assume possible damage at less than 10 minutes. Given that clinical sessions are conducted at much higher intensities, a simple extrapolation to the clinical scenario could indicate damage within seconds, not minutes. The chorionic villi comprise the essential nutrient-waste exchange apparatus between mother and fetus.
" J. Zhang (2002) has huge implications for many childhood diseases, for example, the present-day emergence of childhood cancers and leukemia. DNA fragmentation happens to be the foremost theory for cancer causation. The epidemic of neonatal jaundice should be considered because the CHS confirm the older Euro-American studies that found dysfunction of immune systems caused by DUS. Those studies were discussed in the WHO Criteria. "
50 Human Studies, in Utero, Conducted in Modern China, Indicate Extreme Risk for Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography
EHC 22 on Ultrasound - 1982
Diagnostic ultrasound: effects on the DNA and growth patterns of animal cells
Morphological changes in the surface characteristics of cultured cells after exposure to diagnostic ultrasound
Ultrasound and autism: association, link, or coincidence?
Mice exposed to diagnostic ultrasound in utero are less social and more active in social situations relative to controls
Potential teratogenic effects of ultrasound on corticogenesis: implications for autism
Severity of ASD symptoms and their correlation with the presence of copy number variations and exposure to first trimester ultrasound
Benefits and risks of ultrasound in pregnancy
Prenatal ultrasound and childhood autism: long-term follow-up after a randomized controlled trial of first- vs second-trimester ultrasound
I, like many others, had no idea of the damage ultrasound causes and didn't even realise opting out is a thing to consider. Below are a few articles with huge amount of information that I tried to somehow summarize. A single child that has to bear this burden before even stepping into this world is a tragedy. By spreading the word I hope a few can be spared.
Prenatal Ultrasound—Not So Sound After All
"...Despite the absence of demonstrated benefits, there is also a trend toward “new applications of ultrasound…at earlier stages in pregnancy” (p. 47), including Doppler fetal heart rate monitoring that magnifies the unborn baby’s exposure manyfold.
"...two recent books make the opposite case. One author—backed up by over 1500 scientific citations—argues that prenatal ultrasound is so harmful to children that it “should be banned from obstetrics immediately.” The other contends that the “subtle and not-so-subtle” biological effects of ultrasound “have set the human species on a tragic path” from which it may take generations to recover.
"Few prospective parents realize that ultrasound technology is not just sound waves but is based on non-ionizing radiation."
"...In the mid-1980s, a best-selling doctor/author likened ultrasound to other “unproven” technologies “being sold to the public as being ‘perfectly safe’” and scolded the medical profession for failing to take the “necessary steps to protect people against a malignant technology.” Around the same time, the World Health Organization declared (in vain) that concerns about ultrasound’s clinical efficacy and safety “do not allow a recommendation for routine screening.”
"According to the author of one of the recent ultrasound critiques, the technology causes far-reaching damage. Describing a series of studies published in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the author notes that “a single exposure to ultrasound produced cellular and DNA damage similar to 250 chest x rays”—and “[d]amage was permanent and heritable for ten generations and beyond.” Forms of damage included “DNA shearing, single and double strand breaks, chromosome rearrangements and DNA uncoiling, deformities and mutations in offspring, as well as the complete deactivation of genetic material within sonicated cells.”
"The second recent book summarizes 50 studies of prenatal ultrasound in China, describing “alteration and injuries in the organs, tissues [and] cellular ultrastructures” and “damage to the cytokine signaling in molecules, red blood cells, neurons and mitochondria.” The author notes that the physics of ultrasound are “dramatic”; for example, industry uses ultrasound “to disintegrate and blend materials, and to weld steel.” Airing the concept of “toxic synergy,” the book also suggests that “ultrasound is an effective synergist…theoretically capable of initiating fetal vulnerabilities to subsequent toxic exposure”; thus, “the risk of subsequent exposure to vaccines, birth drugs, antibiotics and other environmental stressors would be raised by prenatal ultrasound, not in addition, but as a multiplier”
"...This FDA action ensured that babies born after 1991 would be exposed to even more radiation as compared to those born in the 1970s and 80s, hence these children have a greater risk of radiation-induced genetic and/or brain damage that can lead to autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders.
"Researchers have pointed out that the autism epidemic took off at around the same time that ultrasound use and intensity increased. To explain this association, they note the presence of central nervous system alterations in animals exposed to ultrasound in utero. For example, a study in mice found that fetal exposure to diagnostic ultrasound altered “typical social behaviors…that may be relevant for autism.”
"...Casanova frankly states that “ltrasounds are being done without regards to the safety of the patients.” He points out that a third of all ultrasound practitioners fail to adhere to safety regulations and notes that at least 40% of ultrasound equipment is defective. In addition, he observes that many practitioners “don’t see anything wrong” with using ultrasound during the first trimester, even though safety regulations discourage first-trimester use in uneventful pregnancies. "
Ultrasound Pregnancy Risks
"...Children, and especially developing babies in the womb, are at great risk from exposure to non-ionizing technologies since children's brains and bodies absorb more radiation, and the bone marrow in their head absorbs up to 10x as much radiation as does that of adults.
"In truth, all living things are in danger from exposure to non-ionizing technologies and this includes radiation from cell towers, cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors, wifi devices, and 5G technology which is being introduced. Because these devices are now ubiquitous in our society—and because children are now being exposed 24/7 (even while in the womb)—it is important for parents to understand the facts about non-ionizing technologies so that they can protect themselves and their children from harm.
"...In both human and animal studies, ultrasound exposure in utero has been repeatedly shown to cause intrauterine growth restriction and low birth weight. Medical researchers at the FDA have known about this for decades, with an FDA spokesperson acknowledging in the early 1990s that:
“We’ve been looking at a population of children – about 2,000 children – about half of whom have been irradiated [with ultrasound] in the Denver, Colorado area. And the indication there is that these children who have been irradiated have a reduced birth weight.”
"Despite this knowledge, in 1991, the FDA decided to increase the maximum allowable output levels for obstetrical ultrasound machines at least eightfold, with some sources saying that output levels increased 10 to-15-fold over the next few years.
"...Significantly, both fetal heart monitoring and ultrasound scans have been repeatedly shown to have no benefit in terms of neonatal outcome.
"...Both ultrasound scans and Doppler fetal heart monitors have been repeatedly documented to cause extreme localized temperatures, that can lead to neurological defects, spina bifida, deformations in the head and brain, microcephaly, heart irregularities and defects, and other serious harm.
"Ultrasonically-induced fetal growth retardation (documented in literally dozens of studies as mentioned above) may be due, in part, to restrictions in bone growth caused by bones absorbing excess radiation heat.
“Bone is extremely sensitive to ultrasound heating: the skull of a third-trimester fetus heats up 50 times more quickly than brain tissue when exposed to ultrasound. This means that brain structures lying close to the skull, such as the pituitary and the hypothalamus, are especially at risk of secondary heating.”
"...ultrasound-induced reproductive damage is extremely well-documented, and the medical establishment has known, since at least 1955, that ultrasound can have deleterious effects on the menstrual cycle, decrease ovulation rates, cause problems with embryo implantation, and trigger structural alterations in ovarian and testicular tissue.
",,,The medical establishment is well aware that ultrasound stops sperm production. This is why doctors are currently using it as a form of male contraception.
"Two 15 minute blasts to the adult male scrotum ensures a minimum of six months infertility, and infertility can be permanent. "
Russian Study Confirms Disastrous Genetic Damage from Prenatal Ultrasound
",,,Before using an ultrasound generator, DNA molecules produce sounds over a wide range, from several to hundreds of hertz-Hz. And after using ultrasound, molecules sounded with special emphasis on the same frequency of 10 Hz. This frequency remained the same for several weeks after the experiment and its amplitude was not reduced at all. Figuratively speaking, the diversity of frequencies has been lost in the symphony of life, and one penetrating frequency – tone has prevailed.
"...the most striking was the following result – when they prepared a new DNA preparation and placed it in an old ultrasound-stricken place. Suddenly the specimen began to show all signs as if he had been hit by ultrasound.
"After a series of tests, scientists came to a surprising conclusion. Ultrasound hurt DNA molecules and they remembered it. DNA molecules have experienced a strong shock, after which they have long recovered and eventually created a wave phantom of pain and fear that remained in place for their terrible experiment. Under the influence of this phantom, even the second, new DNA molecule, they experienced a similar shock that left them with the same consequences!
"Further studies have shown that during ultrasound irradiation, double DNA spirals unravel and even tear, as is the case with strong heating of these molecules. At the moment of these mechanical damages, electromagnetic waves are formed that form the phantom. It is able to destroy DNA as well as heat and ultrasound.
"...Using ultrasound can have disastrous consequences for future generations. It is not excluded that ultrasound techniques can be carried out in a targeted manner to damage the genetic potential of humans. "
Germany Bans Prenatal Ultrasound for Non-Medical Use
“The high levels of ultrasound required for imaging are associated with a potential risk to the unborn baby, especially as significantly more sonic energy is absorbed into the bone at the onset of bone formation. In addition, reliable studies on the consequences of this application are lacking […]. Therefore, ultrasound applications are used for a non-medical purpose, e.g.for pure imaging of the fetus (“baby cinema”), without a medical indication was made prohibited […]. “
Ultrasound Risks
"...DUS [diagnostic ultrasound] is not natural sound. It is usually at a frequency of 3 to 9 megahertz with harmonics and random sonic effects. Its fundamental frequencies are higher than the EMF carrier frequencies for the AM radio band. Human hearing range is only 20 to 20,000 hertz. DUS wave pressures can be thousands times that of the hearing pain threshold.
"The physics are dramatic. "Environmental Health Criteria 22: Ultrasound," published in 1982 by The World Health Organization (WHO), states that ultrasound cavitation can create powerful shockwaves far above the speed of sound. It can create cavitational bubble collapse temperatures of thousands of degrees.
"...DUS is widely declared to be "harmless," despite mothers describing on internet forums, such as The Thinking Moms' Revolution, fetal trauma, maternal pain, and events preceding ultrasound-associated damage to their child. Other forums describe vaginal bleeding following DUS.
"...…more than 35 published animal studies suggest that in utero ultrasound exposure can affect prenatal growth… A number of biological effects have been observed following ultrasound exposure in various experimental systems. These include reduction in immune response, change in sister chromatid exchange frequencies, cell death, change in cell membrane functions, degradation of macromolecules, free radical formation, and reduced cell reproductive potential… The data on clinical efficacy and safety do not allow a recommendation for routine screening….
"...Our findings suggested that [five or more ultrasound sessions] increase the proportion of growth-restricted fetuses by about one third. …it would seem prudent to limit ultrasound examinations of the fetus...
"...Stalberg nevertheless finds some increased risk for boys (not girls) in the following categories: schizophrenia, lower intellectual ability, lower performance in school, lower performance in physical education, and a tendency towards left-handedness.
"Stalberg concludes that the increased risks did not reach statistical significance, though with important exceptions.
"Boys exposed to ultrasound at any time during gestation had lower mean grades in physical education and a tendency towards lower school grades in general.
…these studies assessed ultrasound exposure in the 1970 and 1980s, with average intensity output levels for ultrasound machines of around 20 mW/cm2. This is very low compared to the maximum limit of 720 mW/cm2 set by the U.S. FDA… outputs are probably ten times higher today.... Further, the intensities for ultrasound machines are based on the manufacturer's data and high discrepancies have been found....
"...Siegel (1979) observed increased cell detachment at low exposure. This relates to problematic embryo implantation and fetal growth restriction. The study was discussed in the WHO Criteria 22 as a reason to deny routine DUS.
"Cachon (1981) observed damage to cell microtubules with only 10 seconds exposure at low intensity of 8mW/cm2. The study was discussed in the WHO Criteria 22 as a reason to deny routine.
"Ellisman (1987) observed myelination disruption at the extremely low intensity of 0.135mW/cm2. This is a rat pup study emulating the human fetal scenario. No serious discussion followed this essential, devastating study of DUS. Though initially given a high quality rating by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), it was later denied funding for continuation.
"Beverley Beech, of AIMSUK, characterizes the importance of animal studies:
"Over the years there have been numerous studies on rats, mice and monkeys which have found reduced fetal weight in babies... in the monkey studies, the ultrasound babies sat or lay around the bottom of the cage, whereas the little control monkeys were climbing up the bars and were up to the usual monkey tricks... What happens when the monkeys grow up?... as Jean Robinson has pointed out, monkeys do not learn to read, write, multiply, sing opera, or play the violin.
"...During 1991, FDA negotiations among "interested parties" resulted in an 8x15x increase in allowable DUS machine intensities with safety responsibility entirely on the operator.
"...As intensities and disease increased, did the NIH step up, appropriately fund studies? No. The opposite. Only a few studies were conducted after 1991. Most of these studies found ultrasound hazardous but were denied funding for continuance, and/or, their observations were ignored.
"...Worse than inappropriate science is no science. Abramowicz (2013) says:
"…for fetal imaging, the ISPTA was allowed to increase by a factor of almost 16 from 1976 and almost 8 from 1986 to 1992, yet… all epidemiological information available regarding fetal effects predates 1992.
"...The book was published under the title, 50 Human Studies Indicate Extreme Risk for Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography.
"...Unknown to Western scientists and the public, the hazards of ultrasound to the human fetus have been confirmed in China since the late 1980s. This involved approximately 50 human studies, over 100 scientists, and 2,700 pregnant women (maternal-fetal pairs). These women were volunteering for abortion. Before abortion, they were exposed to carefully controlled DUS exposure levels, relevant to the clinical scenario. The studies were conducted over a period of 23 years, with the last, found so far, published in year 2011. These studies analyze abortive matter via electron-microscopy and biochemical assays.
"...The CHS are simple. Pregnant women, volunteering for abortion, were carefully selected and then exposed to controlled ultrasound sessions, using standard clinical devices at various intensity settings and exposure durations. Abortive matter was examined via state-of-the-art technology, e.g., electron microscopy, flow cytometry, and various biochemical analyses (immuno- and histo-). The results were compared against the results of sham-exposed pregnant women (maternal-fetal pairs exposed at zero intensity).
"Chinese scientists measured damage to the fetal brain, kidney, cornea, chorionic villi, and immune system. They determined that low exposure is able to damage the human fetus, ovum, and embryo.
"...J. Zhang (2002) is the amazing electrophoresis study, a human in utero exposure study. The study is unknown and never discussed, like nearly all of the CHS, despite being published in pristine English and in modern scientific format. The study finds DNA fragmentation in the chorionic villi caused by low intensity DUS at only 10 minutes exposure.
"The study's results are so strong that we could assume possible damage at less than 10 minutes. Given that clinical sessions are conducted at much higher intensities, a simple extrapolation to the clinical scenario could indicate damage within seconds, not minutes. The chorionic villi comprise the essential nutrient-waste exchange apparatus between mother and fetus.
" J. Zhang (2002) has huge implications for many childhood diseases, for example, the present-day emergence of childhood cancers and leukemia. DNA fragmentation happens to be the foremost theory for cancer causation. The epidemic of neonatal jaundice should be considered because the CHS confirm the older Euro-American studies that found dysfunction of immune systems caused by DUS. Those studies were discussed in the WHO Criteria. "
50 Human Studies, in Utero, Conducted in Modern China, Indicate Extreme Risk for Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography
EHC 22 on Ultrasound - 1982
Diagnostic ultrasound: effects on the DNA and growth patterns of animal cells
Morphological changes in the surface characteristics of cultured cells after exposure to diagnostic ultrasound
Ultrasound and autism: association, link, or coincidence?
Mice exposed to diagnostic ultrasound in utero are less social and more active in social situations relative to controls
Potential teratogenic effects of ultrasound on corticogenesis: implications for autism
Severity of ASD symptoms and their correlation with the presence of copy number variations and exposure to first trimester ultrasound
Benefits and risks of ultrasound in pregnancy
Prenatal ultrasound and childhood autism: long-term follow-up after a randomized controlled trial of first- vs second-trimester ultrasound
