ultrasound was Re:Humanity at risk: are males going first? !!!!

[Guest guest]

certainly a possibility

Thanks for sharing that.

Sheri

At 01:10 AM 9/21/2008, you wrote:

>Besides vaccines, could ultrasound also be

>responsible for the increase in male genital birth defects?

>Increasingly Common Birth Defects

>Dr. Rakic's research team, cited earlier in this article for its

>recent study on mouse brains and ultrasound, pointed out that " the

>probe was held stationary for up to 35 minutes, meaning that

>essentially the entire fetal mouse brain would have been continually

>exposed to the ultrasound for 35 minutes…in sharp contrast to the

>duration and volume of the human fetal brain exposed by ultrasound

>which will typically not linger on a given tissue volume for greater

>than one minute. " (42) This is an excellent point, which is worth

>pursuing.

>One of the most popular non-medical uses of ultrasound, which can

>extend a medically indicated session, is to determine the sex of the

>baby. Could this have a connection to the

>increase in birth defects involving the genitals and urinary tract?

>The March of Dimes says that these types of birth defects affect " as

>many as 1 in 10 babies, " adding that " specific causes of most of these

>conditions is unknown. " (43)

>Following this line of thought, consider what other parts of the

>body are scrutinized by ultrasound technicians, such as the heart,

>where serious defects have soared nearly 250 percent between 1989 and

>1996.(44) The list of unexplained birth defects is not a short one, and

>in light of what is emerging about prenatal ultrasound, scientists

>should take another look at all recent trends, as well as the baffling

>30% increase in premature births since 1981, now affecting one in every

>eight children (45), with many showing subsequent neurological

>damage.(46)

>Although many claim that ultrasound benefits outweigh the risks,

>that statement has no basis and much evidence is to the contrary. A

>large randomized trial of 15,151 pregnant women, conducted by the

>RADIUS Study Group, found that in low-risk cases, high-risk subgroups

>and even in cases of multiple gestations or major anomalies, the use of

>ultrasound did not result in improved outcome in the pregnancies.(47)

>The argument that ultrasound is either reassuring to the parents or

>provides an early opportunity for bonding pales in the face of the

>possible risks that are emerging as new data become available. Parents

>and health practitioners may not be able to easily turn away from this

>window on the womb and resume more traditional practices in obstetrics

>and midwifery. However, with the disturbing trend in autism and other

>equally troubling, unexplained birth-related trends, it does not make

>sense to blindly employ a technology that is not reliably safe for

>unborn babies.

>http://www.midwiferytoday.com/articles/ultrasoundrodgers.asp