Is Prenatal Ultrasound Really Safe?
Since the mid-1970s, parents have been repeatedly told that prenatal ultrasound is “perfectly safe” during pregnancy because it is “just sound waves” and does not use ionizing radiation. Expectant mothers have been encouraged (and also pressured) by their care providers to undergo multiple ultrasound scans during pregnancy, as well as Doppler fetal heart monitoring, which is also ultrasound-based. Many babies born today have been exposed to ultrasound multiple times during gestation, and some of these children may have been exposed to ultrasonic fetal heart monitors for hours or even daysduring hospital birth. Yet this kind of extended exposure to ultrasound has been documented to cause fetal death[1] and ultrasound is being repeatedly linked to fetal demise.[2] [3] [4]
Despite medical assurances of safety, ultrasound is not just sound waves. In fact, it is non‑ionizing radiation, and many thousands of studies have confirmed that this type of radiation is harmful[5] [6] [7] to humans and other life forms.[8] [9] [10] All living things are in danger from exposure to technologies that emit non-ionizing radiation, and this includes technologies like cell phones,[11] [12] [13] cordless phones,[14] [15] wifi routers,[16] [17]baby monitors,[18] [19] [20] smart meters,[21] [22] [23] etc. Children, and especially developing babies in the womb, are at great risk from non-ionizing technologies, including ultrasound, since their brains and bodies absorb more radiation,[24] [25] and since their bone marrow absorbs up to 10x as much radiation as does that of adults.[26] [27]
On the FDA’s website in a section entitled “Radiation‑Emitting Products,” we are told that “ultrasound… is based on non-ionizing radiation, so it does not have the same risks as X-rays…” However, many dozens of studies have confirmed that ultrasound produces very similar biological damage to the damage caused by x-rays and other technologies that emit ionizing radiation.[28] [29] [30] For example, a study done in the early 1980s by Dr. Doreen Liebeskind, et al., found that a single exposure to ultrasound produced DNA damage similar to 250 chest x‑rays.[31] The genetic damage was permanent and heritable for ten generations and beyond.[32]
Ultrasonically-induced DNA damage is extremely well-documented and includes DNA fragmentation,[33] DNA shearing,[34] single and double stand breaks,[35] chromo-somal breaks and aberrations,[36] an increase in sister chromatid exchange,[37] [38] and even the complete deactivation of genetic material.[39]
DNA-damaged fetal cells can quickly replicate and multiply during cell division, leaving developing babies susceptible to mutated development, and/or cancerous tumors, leukemia, and other life-threatening illnesses over time. As with all forms of radiation damage, the effects of ultrasonic irradiation may not show up for several years, and herein lies the insidious nature of this technology. Since an ultrasound beam can penetrate deep into the body without showing any signs of damage on the skin, the children who are exposed to this radiation during gestation may appear normal at birth, yet the internal contents of their bodies have been cooked, scrambled, and severely disturbed by ultrasound, causing potential damage to blood, brain, bones, reproductive organs, heart, and more.
Ultrasound scans, and especially doppler fetal heart monitors, have been shown to cause extremely high levels of heating[40] [41] [42] which can lead to neurological defects,[43] spina bifida,[44] deformations in the head and brain,[45] heart irregularities and defects,[46] [47] and other serious biological harm. Ultrasound has been linked to fetal growth retardation in multiple studies,[48] [49] [50] and this may, in part, be due to restriction in bone growth caused by the bone absorbing radiation heat.[51]
Prenatal ultrasound is being linked to low birth weight,[52] fetal abnormalities,[53] miscarriage,[54] [55] preterm labor,[56] infertility,[57] heart defects,[58]autism,[59] [60] hearing loss,[61] speech problems,[62] leukemia,[63] etc.
Furthermore, the medical establishment has known, since at least 1955, that ultrasound interferes with fertility.[64] Ultrasound has been shown to have deleterious effects on the menstrual cycle,[65]induce premature ovulation,[66] cause problems with embryo implantation,[67] and trigger structural alterations in ovarian[68]and testicular tissue.[69] The latter may be contributing to the rising rates of genital defects we are seeing since the 1970s when ultrasound was first mainstreamed in obstetrics.
Ultrasound has been documented to permanently halt sperm production[70] and, in fact, the medical establishment is currently using ultrasound as a form of male contraception.[71] [72] Ultrasonic irradiation is being used to induce non-invasive vasectomies since it can literally “cook” the vas deferens of adult males and thereby block the tubes that deliver sperm to the penis.[73] Additionally, two 15‑minute blasts of ultrasound to the adult male scrotum ensures a minimum of six months infertility,[74] and infertility can be permanent.[75] If infertility is temporary, the quality of new sperm is in question, since ultrasound can cause genetic defects in sperm and contribute to the myriad new or de novo genetic mutations we are seeing in children today, including children with autism.
Moreover, if ultrasound can stop sperm production and cook the reproductive organs of adult men, what we do we suppose is happening to our developing babies when they direct that beam at the genitals to discover the sex of the child?
Infertility is skyrocketing in the U.S., with men now producing 60% less sperm than they did in 1975[76] (when ultrasound was mainstreamed in obstetrics). Female fertility is also in steep decline and the U.S. is currently experiencing its lowest birth rate ever recorded since 1909[77] when the government first began tracking fertility.
Radiation exposure in utero is no doubt playing a huge role in this terminal decline. Exposure to cell phones, cordless phones, baby monitors, etc., is also contributing to an existential fertility and genetic crisis, prompting British physicist, Barrie Trower, to predict that within 50-60 years, we are going to bear witness to a radiation-induced disaster that will leave only one in eight children healthy.[78]
Entire genetic bloodlines are at risk because of our addiction to radiation-emitting technologies, including ultrasound, and we are not the only species that is being harmed. It is imperative that we acknowledge the danger of what we are doing and put an end to this madness NOW. Not only do we need to return to sane technology that will not endanger our lives, but we also need to say NO to harmful medical interventions like ultrasonography so that we can protect ourselves and our children from further harm.
Based on the book, “The Dark Side of Prenatal Ultrasound and the Dangers of Non‑Ionizing Radiation – Part 1,” available at www.BirthofaNewEarth.com.
ENDNOTES
[1] 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.
[2] K.A. Curto, Early Postpartum Mortality Following Ultrasound Radiation, Division of Biological Effects, Bureau of Biological Health, Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD.
[3] 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).
[4] 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
[5] Studies, JustProveIt.net, 2010.
[9] Arthur Firstenberg, The Invisible Rainbow, 2017, AGB Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico, Chapter 16, citing Bienenvater, Issue No. 9, 2003 and F. Ruzicka, Shaden Durch Elektrosmog, Bienenwelt, 2003, Vol 10: 34-35.
[11] L Hardell, et al., Case–control study on cellular and cordless phones and the risk for acoustic neuroma or meningioma in patients diagnosed 2000–2003, Neuroepidemiology, 2005, Vol 25: 120–128.
[12] G.N. De Iuliis, et al., Mobile phone radiation induces reactive oxygen species production and DNA damage in human spermatozoa in vitro, PLoS ONE, Jul 7 2009, Vol 4
[13] Pauline Anderson, Long-term Cell Phone Use Linked to Brain Tumor Risk, Medscape.com, November 13, 2014. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/834888
[14] D.L. Davis, et al., Swedish review strengthens grounds for concluding that radiation from cellular and cordless phones is a probable human carcinogen, Pathophysiology, Apr 2013, Vol. 20(2): 123-9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23664410
[17] Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt, Dr. Klinghardt’s Most Important Talk: “Exposure to Wifi & EMF’s – Root Cause of Health Problems”, Youtube.com, Aug 5, 2018. https://youtu.be/GvX1cv6V-PE
[18] Neil Cohen, Wireless Baby Monitor Radiation Measuring RF Radiation from Wireless Baby Monitor, EMF Safety Zone Youtube Channle, Nov 28, 2018. https://youtu.be/sXC-vOB9YdE
[22] Smart Meter Health Complaints, EMF Safety Network.
[24] L. Lloyd Morgan, et al., Why children absorb more microwave radiation than adults: The consequences, Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure, Dec 2014, Vol 2(4): 197-204, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213879X14000583
[25] J. Wiart, et al., Analysis of RF exposure in the head tissues of children and adults, Phys Med Biol, 2008, Vol 53(13) (2008):3681-3695
[26] A. Christ, et al., Age-dependent tissue-specific exposure of cell phone users, Phys Med Biol, 2020, Vol 55: 1767-1783
[28] Earl H. Newcomer, et al., Chromosomal and Nuclear Aberrations Induced by Ultrasonic Vibrations, American Journal of Botany, February 1949, Volume 36(2), pp 230-236. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2437793
[29] M. Kato, Visible Mutation Induced in Drosphila by Ultrasonic Vibration, Bulletin of the Osaka Medical School, 1966, Vol. 12:114-188.
[30] 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).
[31] D. Liebeskind, et al., Morphological changes in the surface characteristics of cultured cells after exposure to diagnostic ultrasound, Radiology, Feb. 1981, 138(2):419-23. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7455124
[32] D. Liebeskind, et al., Diagnostic Ultrasound: Time Lapse and Transmission Electron Microscopic Studies of Cells Isonated In Vitro, Br. J.Cancer, 1982, Vol. 45, Suppl. V, p. 176.
[33] V. Garaj-Vrhovac, et al., Induction of Micronuclei in Human Lymphocytes After Occupational Exposure to Ultrasound, Chemosphere, 1999, Vol 39(15): 3541-3553, https://academia.edu/27098722/Induction_of_micronuclei_in_human_lymphocytes_after_occupational_exposure_to_ultrasound citing H. Galperin-Lemaitre, et al., Fragmentation of purified mammalian DNA molecules by ultrasound below human therapeutic doses, Humangenefik., 1975, Vol 29: 61-66 and T. Kondo, et al, Damage in DNA irradiated with 1.2 MHz ultrasound and its effect on template activity of DNA for RNA synthesis, Radiation Research, 1985, Vol 104: 284-292, and T. Kondo and G Yoshii, Effect of intensity of 1.2 MHz ultrasound on change in DNA synthesis of irradiated mouse L cells, Ultrasound in Medicine Biology,1985, Vol 11(l): 113-119, and V. Garaj-Vrhovac et al., Cytogenetic effects of occupational exposure to ultrasound: pilot study, In Abstracts of 2Sth annual meeting of EEMS, 1995; p 135, and D.L. Miller and R.M. Thomas, The role of cavitation in the induction of cellular DNA damage by ultrasound and lithotripter shock waves in vitro, Ultrasound in Medicine Biology,1996; 22(S): 681-687, and DL Miller et al, Comet assay reveals DNA strand breaks induced by ultrasonic cavitiation in vitro, Ultrasound in Medicine Biology, 1995, Vol 21(6): 841-848.
[34] John Thacker, The Possibility of Genetic Hazard from Ultrasonic Radiation, Current Topics in Radiation Research Quarterly, 8, 1973, pp 235-258.
[35] Rinko Kubota, et al., Double‐Strand Breaks in Genome‐Sized DNA Caused by Ultrasound, Chemphyschem, April 19, 2017, Vol 18(8): 959-964. https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5413823/
[36] S.M. Morris, et al., Effect of Ultrasound on Human Leucocytes. Sister Chromatid Exchange Analysis, Ultrasound in Med & Biol, Vol 4: 253-258 citing I.J.C. MacIntosh, et al., Relationship between intensity of ultrasound and induction of chromosome aberrations, Br J Radiol, 1972, Vol 45: 320-327 and H. Galperin-Lemaitre, et al., Fragmetation of purified mammalian DNA molecules by ultrasound below human therapeutic doses, Humangenetick, 1975, Vol 29: 61-66.
[37] C.A. Ehlinger, et al., Diagnostic ultrasound increases sister chromatid exchange; preliminary report, Wisconsin Medical Journal, August 1981, Vol 80: 21-22.
[38] N. Ozawa, et al., Sister Chromatid Exchanges in Human Lymphocytes after Exposure to Pulse-Wave Ultrasound, Tohoku J Exp Med, 1984, Vol 143: 473-480.
[39] Dr. Peter Gariaev, as posted at A.K. Loskotová, Ultrazvuk poškozuje DNA, odhaluje studie / Doporučuji, Karolinaloskotova.blog.cz, Nov 13, 2018 as translated from Czech at google.translate.com.
[40] Zhi-Hong Zheng, MD, et al, Letter to the Editor – Neurosurgical Forum, Trigeminal neuralgia, J Neurosurg, 2015, Vol 123:289–296. http://thejns.org/doi/pdf/10.3171/2014.11.JNS142219
[41] Ultrasound dangers to the developing fetus. Part I, EMF Facts Consultancy, EMFFacts.com, August 6, 2009, citing a study done by Dr. Stan Barnett, Section Manager of the CSIRO’s National Measurement Laboratory’s Division of Radiophysics, and author of the 1994 report “Status of research on biological effects and safety of electromagnetic radiation: telecommunications frequencies.” https://www.emfacts.com/2006/08/534-ultrasound-dangers-to-the-developing-fetus/
[42] S.B. Barnett and G. Gossoff, Safety of Diagnostic Ultrasound, New York : The Parthenon Pub. Group, 1998. Also see S.B. Barnett, et al, The sensitivity of biological tissue to ultrasound, Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, 1997, Vol 23(6): 805-812. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301562997000276
[43] David Blake, Ultrasound: Autism, Agriculture, and a Future Tool for Treating Neurological Diseases, The University of New Carolina at Pembroke, undw.edu, https://uncw.edu/csurf/Explorations/documents/blakedavid.pdf citing S.B. Barnett, Intracranial temperature elevation from diagnostic ultrasound, Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 2001, Vol 27(7): 883-888.
[44] M.R. Sikov, at al., Effects of prenatal exposure to ultrasound, in Advances in the Study of Birth Defects: Teratological Testing, T.V.N. Persaud (ed), University Park Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1979:267-291.
[45] Jim West, Ultrasound Causation for Microcephaly and Zika Virus, The Hypothesis (Part A), (Kindle Location 1224). harvoa. Kindle Edition. http://harvoa.org/chs/pr/dusbk2.htm
[46] E.N. Harvey, The Effect of High Frequency Sound Waves on Heart Muscle and other Irritable Tissues, Amer Jour Physiol, 1929, Vol 91: 284-290.
[47] M.R. Sikov, at al., Effects of prenatal exposure to ultrasound, in Advances in the Study of Birth Defects: Teratological Testing, T.V.N. Persaud (ed), University Park Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1979: 267-291.
[48] H.D. Stewart, et al., 1985, citing E.L. Diamond, FDA Contract Report on Assessment of Ultrasound Exposure During Gestation and Neonatal Growth, FDA Contract No. 223-83-6023, John Hopkins University, February 1985.
[49] E.A. Lyons, et al., Followup study in children exposed to ultrasound in utero – analysis of height and weight in first six years of life, in Proceedings of 28th Annual Convention, American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, September 15-19, 1980, Volume 49. (Also see “Bioeffect brouhaha,” AIUM bioeffects panel discussion, in Diagnostic Imaging, December 1963, pp 60-63).
[50] R.M. Moore, Effects of sonic radiation on growth and development, Am J Epidemiology, 1982, Vol 116: 571.
[51] H. Shankar, et al., Potential Adverse Ultrasound-related Biological Effects: A Critical Review, Anesthesiology, November 2011, Vol 115: 1109-1124, http://anesthesiology.pubs.asahq.org/Article.aspx?articleid=1934478 citing C. Doody, et al, In vitro heating of human fetal vertebra by pulsed diagnostic ultrasound, Ultrasound Med Biol, 1999, Vol 25: 1289–1294, and J.L. Drewniak, et al., In vitro ultrasonic heating of fetal bone, J Acoust Soc Am, 1989, Vol 86: 1254–1258, and E.L. Carstensen, et al., Ultrasonic heating of the skull, J Acoust Soc Am, 1990, Vol 87: 1310–1317.
[53] L.M. Kinnier Wilson, Obstetric Ultrasound and Childhood Malignancies, The Lancet, November 3, 1984 citing ME Stratmeyer, Research in Ultrasound Bioeffects: A Public Health View, Birth Fam J, 1980, Vol 7: 92-100.
[54] 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.
[55] Alley Apple Tree, An Ultrasound (may have) Killed My Baby, Youtube.com, Dec. 17, 2014. https://youtu.be/fd8yhZRqFjI
[56] H.D. Stewart, et al., 1985, citing E.L. Diamond, FDA Contract Report on Assessment of Ultrasound Exposure During Gestation and Neonatal Growth, FDA Contract No. 223-83-6023, John Hopkins University, February 1985.
[58] M.R. Sikov, at al., Effects of prenatal exposure to ultrasound, in Advances in the Study of Birth Defects: Teratological Testing, T.V.N. Persaud (ed), University Park Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1979:267-291.
[60] J.K. Grether, et al., Antenatal ultrasound and risk of autism spectrum disorders, J Autism Dev Disord, Feb 2010, Vol 40(2): 238-45 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19728066 and S.B.C.
[62] JD Campbell, et al., Case-control study of prenatal ultrasonography exposure in children with delayed speech, CMAJ, November 15, 1993, Vol 149(10): 1435-40. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8221427
[63] Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, M.D., “Dr. Robert Mendelsohn on Pregnancy and the Dangers of Ultrasound,” From “Moments with Mendelsohn, A Presentation by Esther Thaler, Ultrasound and Pregnancy, “ http://youtu.be/YfaUQCp6L1s
[64] D. Kamocsay, Effects of Ultrasonics on the Testicles – Experimental Studies in White Rats, Arztliche Forschung, 1955, Vol. 9: 389-395
[66] West, Jim. 50 Human Studies, in Utero, Conducted in Modern China, Indicate Extreme Risk for Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography (Kindle Locations 542-548). harvoa. Kindle Edition citing Zhuang Qing Song, Effects of Diagnostic Ultrasonic Wave on the Ultrastructures of the Human Fetus Testicles, 2008.
[67] E. Siegel, et al., Cellular attachment as a sensitive indicator of the effects of diagnostic ultrasound exposure on cultured human cells, Radiology, October 1979, 133(1):175-9, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/472288
[68] 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, p 51
[69] W.D. O’Brien, et al., Morphological changes to mouse testicular tissue from in vivoultrasonic irradiation (preliminary report), Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, 1979, Vol 5(1): 35-43. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/030156297990125X
[72] Jennifer Welsh, Future Male Birth Control May Zap Sperm with Sound Waves, LiveScience.com, January 29, 2012.
[76] Doctors Shocked to Discover Sperm Counts in Western Men Plummeted Nearly 60%, TheAntiMedia.org, July 28, 2017. http://theantimedia.org/sperm-counts-western-men/
[78] Barrie Trower, 5G Gigantic health hazard – Dr Barrie Trower & Sir Julian Rose, Youtube.com, https://youtu.be/DLVIbPtNrVo
No comments:
Post a Comment