Skip to comments.Canadian women subject to extra ultrasounds during pregnancy: study
Posted on 01/06/2010 7:50:51 AM PST by Nachum
Waves of Canadian women are getting extra ultrasounds during pregnancy, often three or more -- a rate that appears to be climbing for no apparent medical reasons.
A new study based on nearly 1.4 million deliveries in Ontario shows more than a third of women -- 37% -- now receive three or more ultrasounds in their second and third trimesters.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalpost.com ...
Ultrasound use is associated with a 30+% increase in left-handedness.
The waves are minutes but powerful pressure waves. It wouldn’t surprise me if there are in fact developmental issues associated with their occasional use.
That is, “minute,” not “minutes.”
You are dealing with an entirely different set of frequencies with a vacuum cleaner, and they are definitely not concentrated.
You make it sound like there is no sound outside of that which you can hear, and all that you hear must be safe. That is ridiculous.
Don't be fooled but the word ‘ultra’. Just because the frequency is high does not make them death ray waves or anything.
I would have another thing for you to think about. Is it possible we have a higher percentage of gay people now than we did 50 years ago?
A number of studies have shown that gay men are more likely to be left-handed. However, as a side note, among those gay men who are right-handed, they are much more likely to have older brothers who are right-handed, strangely enough.
Ultrasounds save lives.
We should give away free ultrasounds in every shopping mall in the world.
Can “lasers” do any damage? Just because laser pointers don’t harm people doesn’t mean industrial lasers can’t.
Just Asian mother’s checking for female babies to abort.
In other words: The socialist Canadian healthcare system doesn’t want to pay for ultrasounds any more.
The article really doesn’t support that conclusion. You have one rettrospective study that is self reporting. The overall set of people evaluated should NO preference for handedness and yet a subset of males did. There is not even an attempt to explain this oddity. Moreover, it cautions against drawing any conclusions on the data since there was no data taken about parents handedness ( since lefties do in fact have lefty children more frequently than rightie parents)
I am not a big fan of multiple ultrasound scans but okease do not throw off some cautionary article as being a smoking gun. It is not
Oh please quit trying to convince people that you unserstand anything about science.
See you really do not have any science background. Even a Class I laser can do damage if misused
Of course, a laser pointer can damage the retina, but not during normal, intended use. I was responding to someone who had said that using a vacuum cleaner in a normal way caused greater pressure waves to a fetus than an ultrasound could. I’m saying that in using a vacuum cleaner as it was meant to be used, there’s not a problem, but when using ultrasound as it was meant to be used, multiple studies have shown this unusual link with an increase in left-handedness.
What, may I ask, is your “science background?”
Oh, please quit trying to sound like you know about science, then.
I have MS and BS degrees from two different universities. What do you have?
What, then, would cause a higher proportion of left-handed parents to have ultrasounds over right-handed parents, if you believe parents’ handedness could be an issue here? I’m curious.
That is a nonsensical question. Have you soent anytime in an advanced science and or mathematics class? Your commentary suggests not
I have a back ground in thermodunamics and lasers and electrooptics. I currently am in a job where I do pure research and development. In the past I have been in r&d for profit (and frustration).
And what field of ‘science’ are your degrees in? Your inability to see that retorspective studies are not indicators of causality is disturbing
If ultrasounds can’t possibly hurt, why not be “a big fan of multiple ultrasound scans?” I mean, come on, they can’t possibly cause a problem to a small little thing like a fetus, right?
Never mind that low intensity ultrasound is used for acoustophoresis, bone and tooth regeneration, and disruption of the blood-brain barrier for drug delivery. Also, never mind that higher-intensity ultrasound is used to break up kidney stones, dental plaque, and even cancerous tumors on people.
Will you next tell us that all of the above uses are bogus, because ultrasound can’t possibly do anything?
I know that correlation does not mean causality, but we know that ultrasounds are energy that can be disruptive on both small and large scale levels.
Would you be willing to prove this, once and for all, on your own child in the womb? Hook the fetus up for ultrasounds every day for a while, maybe recording it for posterity?
Until that is done, or a study in which ultrasound is used extensively on fetuses, you won’t know if there is correlation or causality.
The American Society of Radiologic Technicians
You lunatic. I NEVER said that ultrasounds “can’t possibly hurt”. You cannot extrapolate the way you so desperately want to do. Even water in certain amounts will kill you if administered in a dangerous manner. Pure oxygen is not good for the human lung to breathe exclusively. Your inability to stay focused is truly amazing
That is not the manner in which an appropriate test would be devised in the first place. In the addition you apparently have no understanding of methodolgy
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.