ULTRASOUND LINKED TO MISCARRIAGE AND FETAL DEMISE

Post added 5/27/18

Dear friends – I am feeling an urgency to get this information out to the public, so without much commentary, I am simply going to share quotes from various sources concerning the link between ultrasound and miscarriage/fetal demise.  All of these studies are being cited in my forthcoming book, “The Dark Side of Prenatal Ultrasound.”

People have a right to know that ultrasonic irradiation is killing babies and also causing intrauterine growth retardation. Please share this information widely as well as a link to my main website at www.BirthofaNewEarth.com.

“Research shows populations exposed to ultrasound have a quadrupled perinatal death rate…”(1)

“A large randomised controlled trial from Helsinki (Saari-Kemppainen et al., 1990) randomly divided over 9,000 women into a group who were scanned at sixteen to twenty weeks compared with those who were not. It revealed twenty miscarriages after sixteen to twenty weeks in the screened group and none in the controls.”(2)

“A later study in London (Davies et al., 1992) randomised 2,475 women to routine Doppler ultrasound examination of the umbilical and uterine arteries at nineteen to twenty-two weeks and thirty-two weeks compared with women who received standard care without Doppler ultrasound. There were sixteen perinatal deaths of normally formed infants in the Doppler group compared with four in the standard care group.”(3)

“…[R]esearchers from Queen Charlotte’s and Chelsea Hospital found that those 1246 women having doppler ultrasound were more likely to lose their babies than those in the control group who received only standard neonatal care (17 deaths to seven)…”(4)

“The results indicate that repeated exposures to ultrasound or its combination with X-rays could be detrimental to the embryonic development and can impair adult brain function when administered at certain stages of organogenesis…

The increase in postnatal mortality… suggests that repeated uses of ultrasound at the organogenesis period may be toxic to the embryo. The rise in neonatal mortality may reflect a lethal effect on the fetal development, as the affected fetuses that escape death may succumb during the perinatal or early postnatal period.”(5)

“A study done in Helsinki and published in 1990 (Taskinen et al, 1990) found that if the physiotherapist was pregnant and handling ultrasound equipment for at least 20 hours a week there was a significant increase in the risk of spontaneous abortion.”(6)

“OuelletHellstrom and Stewart reported on a study of female physiotherapists who used either RF or short-wave apparatus and were queried about the outcome of pregnancies. The frequency generated by short-wave equipment was 27.12 MHz and by microwave equipment was 915 MHz and 2450 MHz… Of the microwave-exposed women, 47.7% had miscarriages prior to the 7th week of pregnancy compared to 14.5% of nonexposed women.”(7)

“There was a significant increase in prenatal morality [of rat embryos] with increasing exposure intensity at all gestational stages studied… The incidence and severity of malformations among surviving fetuses tended to increase with intensity… The small number of surviving fetuses at higher intensities limits the precision of quantitative comparisons.”(8)

“Pregnant DHS mice bound to a board were irradiated on the 9th day of gestation with continuous wave (2.25 MHz) ultrasound for a period of 5 hours… The signal source was a commercial fetal Doppler device… [T]he rate of fetal death was said to be increased significantly in the irradiated group. Later, the same authors reported a statistically significant increase in fetal abnormalities in a different mouse strain… and a significant effect on fetal mortality…”(9)

“A Helsinki study showed an increased risk in miscarriages for women who received ultrasound between sixteen to twenty weeks in comparison to women who did not receive scans. In a Michigan study, women at risk for giving premature birth were studied. One group received weekly ultrasound scans. The other group received pelvic exams. In the ultrasound group, women went into preterm labor at 52%. Only 25% of the control group went into preterm labor.”(10)

Sources:

(1) Jeanne Ohm, DC, Common Obstetrical Procedures and Their Link to Autism, PathwaystoFamilyWellness.org, Spring 2009, Issue 21, http://pathwaystofamilywellness.org/Pregnancy-Birth/common-obstetrical-procedures-and-their-link-to-autism.html citing JA Davies, et al, Randomised controlled trial of Doppler ultrasound screening of placental perfusion during pregnancy, Lancet, 1992, Vol 340(8831):1299-303.

(2) Beverly Lawrence Beech, Ultrasound: Weighing the Propaganda Against the Facts, Midwifery Today, Issue 51, Autumn 1999 citing Saari-Kemppainen et al., Ultrasound screening and perinatal mortality: controlled trial of systematic one-stage screening in pregnancy, The Lancet, 1990, Vol 336:387–91.

(3) Beverley A Lawrence Beech, Ultrasound: Weighing the Propaganda Against the Facts, Midwifery Today, Issue 51, Autumn 1999 citing J.A. Davies, et al, Randomised controlled trial of doppler ultrasound screening of placental perfusion during pregnancy, Lancet, November 28, 1992, Vol 340(8831):1299-303.

(4) Scans linked to baby deaths, What Doctors Don’t Tell You, WDDTY.com, Feb. 1, 1993. https://www.wddty.com/news/1993/02/scans-linked-to-baby-deaths.html

(5) M.P. Hande, et al., Teratogenic effects of repeated exposures to X-rays and/or ultrasound in mice, Neurotoxicol Teratol, March-April 1995, Volume 17 (2), pp 179-88. http://www.holisticmed.com/toxic/ultrasound.html

(6) Beverley A. Lawrence Beech, Ultrasound – They Mythology of a Safe and Painless Technology, AIMS.org.uk, Paper presented to the Royal Society of Medicine, October 3, 1995. http://www.aims.org.uk/OccasionalPapers/ultrasoundTheMyth.pdf

(7) John R. Goldsmith, Epidemiologic Evidence Relevant to Radar (Microwave) Effects, Environ Health Perspect, 1997, 105(Suppl 6):1579-1587. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1469943/pdf/envhper00331-0192.pdf

(8) M.R. Sikov, et al., Stage Dependence of Ultrasound-Induced Embryotoxicity in the Rat, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control, March 1986. Vol. UFFC-33(2).

(9) Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging in Pregnancy, Report of a Consensus Development Conference Sponsored by the National Institute of Child Healthy and Human Development, the Office of Medical Applications of Research, the Division of Research Resources, and the Food and Drug Administration, February 6-8, 1984, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. U.S. Dep’t of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, NIH Publication No. 84-667:44-48 citing R. Shoji, et al., An Experimental Study on the Effect of Low-Intensity Ultrasound on Developing Mouse Embryos, J Faculty Science, 1971, Hokkaido University, Series VI, Zoology, Vol 18:51-56 and R. Shoji, et al., Experimental Studies on the Effect of Ultrasound on Mouse Embryos, Teratology, 1972, Vol 6:119, and T. Shimizu, An Experimental Safety Study of Mice Exposed to Low Intensity Ultrasound, 1973, Abstract No. 61, p 18, presented at the 2nd World Congress on Ultrasonics in Medicine, No, 277, The Netherlands, Amsterdam, Excerpta Medica, and R. Shoji, et al., Influence of Low Intensity Ultrasonic Irradiation on Prenatal Development of Two Inbred Mouse Strains, Teratology, 1975, Vol 12:227-232.

(10) Sarah, Pregnancy Vlog Week 24, Adverse Effects of Doppler and Ultrasound, HealthBySarah.com, January 2, 2017.
http://www.healthbysarah.com/pregnancy-vlog-week-24-adverse-effects-of-doppler-and-ultrasound/