Click here to sign the petition for more research and regulation

There are so many problems with the safety of prenatal sonography I don’t even know where to begin.  We need 100,000 signatures on a Federal petition in order to get these problems even  considered by the government, but that’s very hard to do because nobody knows about these problems in the first place.

Just to name a few-

Valid epidemiology cannot be performed because practitioners do not record enough dose information.  So, the safety of modern practice is supported purely by inconclusive, uncoordinated, and mostly obsolete anecdotal evidence.

All research pre-1992 has become obsolete in regards to safety, because in 1992 they increased the max intensity of ultrasound 8-fold for better pictures.

Pretty much everyone can perform prenatal ultrasound regardless of training in clinical environments (and elsewhere).

There is no accountability since no records are kept.

Scientific literature indicates ultrasound has side effects that are likened to symptoms seen in developmental disorders, yet businesses refuse to recognize or educate about this.  Similar to the tobacco industry and cancer studies, why would businesses promote research that could deter profits?

Ultrasound scanners are not required to undergo routine maintenance, unlike other radiology equipment.

…and much more.  I spent months writing this petition to address the main problems of fetal sonography that everyone can agree on needs fixing.  Please sign the petition and share it with your social networks.


2 thoughts on “Click here to sign the petition for more research and regulation

  1. Can some researcher come up with a control group of people who completely decline ultrasound and then look at the autism rate in that group? The rate should then look like it did 40 years ago.

    • Hi, thanks for your idea.

      There are some studies looking at autism rates in groups like the Amish, but that is difficult since autism is socially defined.

      It would be difficult to contrive a study like this. First off, if you were to make an unbiased trial you would have to randomly assign people into an exposure/non-exposure group. So, people would have to sign up for the study to be “possibly randomly assigned into not receiving an ultrasound”. The WHO cites this as a serious problem with performing new epidemiological studies.

      Also, how do you control how much exposure each group gets? The number of scans alone is not how much US is used. It also matters where the US passes through, how intense, the duration of the scan, etc… I’m not to get autism from too much elbow exposure, for example. It’s very complicated.

      On the other hand, while epidemiology is not easy to perform, some labs I collaborate with have found side effects of prenatal US that induce autism-like behaviors and neuropathology in mice. Check out for a behavior study, and the neuropathology study will be published soon. These red flags need followup research.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s