According to a meta-analysis released by the World Health Organization, no obvious detriment to health in the population has been found over 60~ studies. In each study, they compare the number of ultrasound scans performed versus a control and compare health outcomes.
Problem: The number of scans is not an accurate representation of dose.
5 scans for 5 minutes each, and 5 scans for 30 minutes each are going to have a dramatically different duration of ultrasound exposure, but they each are 5 scans. There are many other variables involved for proper risk assessment. A single scan for an hour is more duration than 5 scans for 5 minutes a piece.
This means that these papers are basing their assurance of safety on a fundamentally fallacious argument. Without more accurate dose recording, epidemiology is untenable.
We do not know if ultrasound is safe yet. It could be causing problems in the population and – because of this issue – be pretty much completely undetectable. That is why there are concerns out there that ultrasound could possibly be linked to autism. Other information is pointing towards it, and epidemiology offers little reassurance.
It further compounds the problem that papers like this assure safety because of a lack of evidence rather than evidence to the contrary…
Please sign and share this petition to call attention to this issue: http://www.change.org/petitions/health-risks-of-prenatal-ultrasound-the-urgent-need-for-more-research-and-regulation