|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Fw: Ultrasound Linked to Brain DamageFrom: Joe Cutchin (forcep@intercom.net)Wed Dec 19 15:17:01 2001
> Ricardo Savaris wrote: > > Just received today, > > Any comments? > > Ricardo Savaris, MD > [Image] Ultrasound Scans Linked to Brain Damage in > Babies > > By Robert Matthews > > Evidence suggesting that ultrasound scans on > pregnant women cause brain damage in their > unborn babies has been uncovered by scientists. > > In the most comprehensive study yet on the > effect of the scanning, doctors have found that > men born to mothers who underwent scanning were > more likely to show signs of subtle brain > damage. > > During the 1990s, a number of studies hinted > that ultrasound scanning affected unborn babies. > Research has suggested that subtle brain damage > can cause people who ought genetically to be > right-handed to become left-handed. In addition, > these people face a higher risk of conditions > ranging from learning difficulties to epilepsy. > > Now a team of Swedish scientists has confirmed > the earlier reports on the effects of ultrasound > with the most compelling evidence yet that > unborn babies are affected by the scanning. They > compared almost 7,000 men whose mothers > underwent scanning in the 1970s with 170,000 men > whose mothers did not, looking for differences > in the rates of left- and right-handedness. > > The team found that men whose mothers had scans > were significantly more likely to be left-handed > than normal, pointing to a higher rate of brain > damage while in the womb. Crucially, the biggest > difference was found among those born after > 1975, when doctors introduced a second scan > later in pregnancy. Such men were 32 per cent > more likely to be left-handed than those in the > control group. > > Reporting their findings in the journal > Epidemiology, the researchers warned that scans > in late pregnancy were now routine in many > countries. > > The present results suggest a 30 per cent > increase in risk of left-handedness among boys > pre-natally exposed to ultrasound. If this > association reflects brain injury, this means as > many as one in 50 male fetuses pre-natally > exposed to ultrasound are affected. > > Other doctors and scientists caution that until > further studies are carried out, scanning should > still be regarded as safe by mothers-to-be. If > confirmed, however, the findings would mean that > ultrasound scans are causing slight brain damage > in thousands of babies in Britain each year. > > Ultrasound scans, which were introduced in the > 1960s, have long been regarded as a safe means > of checking on the health of unborn children. > The scanners use high-frequency sound waves to > give X-ray-like images of the inside of the > womb, but without using radiation, which carries > a risk of causing cancer. Between the 1960s and > today, the number of pregnant women having scans > in western Europe has increased from a handful > to virtually all of them. > > Normally, left-handedness is genetic: the > likelihood of two left-handed parents having a > left-handed child is 35 per cent, while for two > right-handed parents, it is only nine per cent. > It is when the incidence of left-handedness > begins to rise above these normal rates that > scientists become concerned that brain damage of > some kind could be a factor. > > Other surveys have shown that premature babies > are five times more likely than normal to be > left-handed. According to the Swedish > researchers, the human brain undergoes critical > development until relatively late in pregnancy, > making it vulnerable to damage. In addition, the > male brain is especially at risk, as it > continues to develop later than the female > brain. > > The growing evidence that ultrasound affects > unborn babies may cast new light on the puzzling > rise in left-handedness over recent years. > > In Britain, the rate has more than doubled, from > five per cent in the 1920s to 11 per cent today. > Researchers have estimated that only 20 per cent > of this rise can be put down to the suppression > of left-handedness among the older generation. > > Dr Francis Duck of the British Medical > Ultrasound Society will chair a discussion of > the results at the international meeting of > ultrasound experts being held this week in > Edinburgh. "When the first study suggesting a > link came out, it was possible to ignore it, but > now this is the third," he said. "What it > demonstrates is the need to investigate the link > further, and to look at possible mechanisms." > > Dr Duck cautioned, however, that ultrasound > scanning has saved the lives of countless > babies: "This research must be seen in context, > and it should not deter anyone from having an > antenatal scan." > > Beverley Beech, the chairman of the Association > for Improvements in Maternity Services, > criticized doctors for insisting for years that > ultrasound was totally safe. > > "I am not sure at all that the benefits of > ultrasound scans outweigh the downsides," said > Ms Beech. "We should be advising women to think > very, very carefully before they have scans at > all." > > http://www.news.telegraph.co.uk December 9, 2001 > > Epidemiology December 2001 12:618 > > ------------------------------------------------- > > ------------------------------------------------- > DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT: > ------------------------------------------------- > > This is certainly not new information, as I > reported on this over two years ago, but the > evidence seems quite compelling now to avoid > ultrasounds during pregnancy unless they are > absolutely necessary. > > Currently in the UK, women typically have one or > two ultrasonic scans during pregnancy, although > more can be recommended to track a particular > condition in the fetus. > > I never did OB in my practice, but I suspect > that the recommendation is similar in the U.S. > > It sure seems that the time for routine > ultrasound examinations has come and gone. > > How ultrasound could affect the brain is still a > mystery though. Some researchers suspect that a > process called cavitation - where small bubbles > in the body fluids vibrate in the ultrasonic > waves - could influence brain development. > > In the early stage of pregnancy, neurons migrate > from the center of the brain and this could be > disturbed by ultrasound, perhaps through > cavitation. > > Related Articles: > > Ultrasound Scans May Harm Unborn > Babies > After 66 years I now know why I am left handed.
--
Joseph H. Cutchin MD FACOG 4105463125
314 West Carroll Street 4105463128 Fax
Salisbury,Maryland 21801
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ultrasound@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: terry.dubose@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Thu Oct 2 05:18:26 2008 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.