"All the World's a Stage We Pass Through" R. Ayana

Showing posts with label ultrasound. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ultrasound. Show all posts

Monday, 19 October 2015

Ultrasound Damages Babies: Human Studies Conducted in Modern China


Ultrasound Damages Babies
Diagnostic Ultrasound: A New Bibliography
Human Studies Conducted in Modern China

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/CRL_Crown_rump_lengh_12_weeks_ecografia_Dr._Wolfgang_Moroder.jpg



Ultrasound is a highly controversial topic. It can now be said, without hyperbole, that an understanding of its mysteries are essential to the well-being of the individual and the human species.

The word “ultrasound” commonly refers to diagnostic ultrasound, an acoustic technology utilized to view images of the fetus in real time, its position within the mother, and to view the mother's reproductive organs. It is an economic boon to medical practitioners who advocate its routine use.

Diagnostic ultrasound is widely declared to be “harmless” to the fetus[1], despite some mothers describe, via online forums such as The Thinking Mother's Revolution, vaginal bleeding and pain, and others describing every detail related to ultrasound and pharmaceutical or vaccine associated damage to their child. Ultrasound is now being applied to most of the entire world population during its fetal stage. The health implications are vast in terms of physical and psychological health for the individual and society.

Ultrasound appears to have set the human species on a tragic path, due to the subtle and not-so-subtle effects of ultrasound exposure. Critics argue, for example, that the exponential rise in autism incidence is a product of fetal exposure to ultrasound. If they are correct, then it may take many generations to recover from this misguided application of medical technology.



 

History

 

 

Ultrasound imaging technology for diagnostic examinations evolved from a type of echo-imaging, originally developed as SONAR, a technology invented to detect submarines by pinging sound waves off the submarine hull and electronically measuring the echo, the duration required to reflect ultrasound from the submarine hull back to the source of the ultrasound.

In the medical field, ultrasound has been in use for many decades, employed to generate “echo images” of the fetus. Ultrasound is not ordinary sound, however. It is a highly unusual form of sound when used for the purpose of prenatal or obstetric diagnostic examinations. Humans ordinarily are capable of hearing sounds in the range of 20 to 20,000 cycles per second (hertz). Ultrasound for fetal examination carries a frequency in the range of 3 to 9 megahertz, millions of cycles per second, above the EMF frequencies of the AM radio band.

Ultrasound imaging technology has supplanted, to a large extent, the earlier common imaging technology, X-rays. That earlier technology is now known publicly to be hazardous, to be carcinogenic, however, it took decades for this knowledge to become public. The history of medical X-ray imaging may be a parallel for ultrasound history.

 

Unconfirmed Hazards

 

 

Ultrasound has long been known to have the potential to produce harmful biological effects in the fetus. This has been found via animal and cell studies. However, these hazards have supposedly not been confirmed by human studies. Funding for ultrasound studies has virtually disappeared since the late 1980s. despite, over the years, rising ultrasound machine intensity levels.

Cibull et al (2013) provides definitive assurance.

“Although laboratory studies have shown that diagnostic levels of ultrasound can produce physical effects in tissue, there is no evidence from human studies of a causal relationship between diagnostic ultrasound exposure during pregnancy and adverse biological effects to the fetus.”[3]

 

Confirmed in China

 

 

Unknown to Western scientists, the hazards of ultrasound have been confirmed in China since the late 1980s, where thousands of women, volunteering for abortion, thousands of maternal-fetal pairs, were exposed to carefully controlled diagnostic ultrasound and the abortive matter then analyzed via laboratory techniques.

From these human studies, Professor Ruo Feng, of the Acoustic Institute at Nanjing University, published guidelines in 2000:

“Commercial or educational fetal ultrasound imaging should be strictly eliminated. Ultrasound for the identification of fetal sex and fetal entertainment imaging should be strictly eliminated. For the best early pregnancy, avoid ultrasound.”

Feng is very clear. He is also gentle. He could have written bluntly, “For a lesser quality pregnancy, use ultrasound.” He could have written the word “fetus” or “child” instead of “pregnancy”.

 

A New Bibliography

 

 

An unprecedented Bibliography of Chinese ultrasound studies, by Jim West, is now available, published as a book with commentary, illustrative graphs and tables. This is a presentation of arcana, i.e., vitally important but unknown scientific studies. The title is, 50 Human Studies Indicate Extreme Risk for Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography.

This is the most important bibliography and commentary ever compiled for the field of ultrasound criticism, though for legal reasons, its conclusions and implications should be suspended, pending trustworthy authoritative review.

The book presents human studies conducted in modern China that examine the results of in utero fetal exposure to diagnostic ultrasound. They exceed Western science in terms of technical sophistication, era relevancy, volume of work, and number of subjects. They bring empirical evidence for ultrasound hazards.

These studies involve the exposure of over 2,700 maternal-fetal pairs to diagnostic ultrasound. The number of scientists involved are approximately 100. Pregnant women were carefully selected and then exposed to controlled ultrasound sessions. Ethical concerns were carefully observed. Abortive matter was examined via state-of-the-art technology, e.g., electron microscopy, flow cytometry, and various biochemical analysis (immuno- and histo-). The results were compared against the results of sham-exposed pregnant women (exposed at zero intensity).

Chinese scientists measured damage to the brain, kidney, cornea, chorionic villi, and the immune system. They determined the amount of ultrasound exposure required to produce damage to the human fetus, and that amount was found to be very low. Ultrasound hazards to the human fetus were confirmed without doubt.

Human studies can be of two types: 1) epidemiological reviews, or, 2) in utero exposure studies, where abortive matter is evaluated in a laboratory following diagnostic ultrasound exposure to the mother and fetus.

Western scientists have conducted only a few epidemiological studies, and virtually no human exposure studies. Epidemiological studies are complex, and are thus highly vulnerable to bias. They are often published as moot or statistically insignificant, despite finding patterns of ultrasound damage.

Due to Western abortion politics, in utero exposure studies were virtually banned. Globally, the medical industry has not reported one case of human damage. Thereby, the practice of diagnostic ultrasound continues under the assumption that humans are “resistant” to ultrasound toxicity.

The Chinese studies were unknown in the Western realm and little known even in the East. These represent 23 years of critical research, from 1988 to 2011. Unfortunately, these studies were overwhelmed by a tremendous flood of studies that promote medical and therapeutic innovations for ultrasound.

The Chinese studies have remained disconnected from the Western realm, beyond discussion outside of China, being the casualty of cultural and language gaps, lacking a benefit for industry, and its scientists being outsiders.

These studies are not generally available through global search engines or medical databases. Even if a researcher knew the titles, the studies would not be found, however, they are available through internal links within the Chinese databases.

 

 

The Research Path

 

 

As of 2013, Jim West had experienced the impossibilities of discussion whenever the topic of ultrasound hazards was attempted, even with his nearest friends. He always brought fine documentation, though to no avail. He was met with reflexive blocks. These were passive and aggressive, apparently out of fear of the birth process and a belief that ultrasound would provide assurance.

Realizing that people require authoritative statements, Jim searched for a simple statement of empirical evidence that could not be denied.

After several months of intensive research within the Western scientific realm, he, like others, realized there was little definitive evidence that would satisfy the strict industrial requirements, that is, there were few human studies of any kind. Human studies had been deemed by authorities to be essential for confirmation of hazards. He was aware of the hundreds of animal and cell studies, but they were known to be ill-designed and inconclusive. Excellent critical studies were contradicted by competing studies that declared ultrasound safe. Jim did find a few very strong animal studies that had not been contradicted, but they were ignored or rejected by mere authoritative assertion.

 

Electrophoresis

 

 

As a working research theory, Jim hypothesized that the ideal modern ultrasound study would utilize a very sensitive type of chromatography, “electrophoresis”, to detect cell damage caused by ultrasound exposure. Electrophoresis is a simple technology, the moving of electric current through a sample of biological matter in order to draw its various components through a gel-covered plate. The various components separate out through the gel, creating visual patterns for analysis. Electrophoresis is used to analyze biological complexes such as nucleic acid (DNA or RNA). It is employed, for example, in DNA fingerprinting, to identify people, their DNA, to detect their prior presence at a location, by examining samples of blood, hair, or tissue and matching those analytical results with suspects who had been similarly analyzed.

Jim's focus on electrophoresis lead to a Chinese electrophoresis study of ultrasound causation for DNA fragmentation in abortive matter. The study is published in pristine scientific format and in English. The study's references lead to an expanding tree of studies located in Chinese online databases such as CNKI. Though these studies are primarily in Chinese language, many contained an Abstract, translated into English manually or by machine software.

Ruo Feng, in his review of the studies, stipulated that routine ultrasound be avoided. Only if there were exceptional medical indications should ultrasound be allowed, and at minimum intensity. Sessions should be very brief, no more than 3 minutes, 5 minutes at most. Multiple sessions should be avoided because hazards are cumulative. Human studies had found sensitive organs damaged at 1 minute exposure.

The Chinese studies echo and confirm the earlier, ignored and rejected, 1984 “Consensus Statement”, published by the National Institute of Health and signed by the preeminent American scientists of that era.[2]

Currently, the medical industry loudly claims that ultrasound is “harmless” while it advocates routine ultrasound for pregnant women and even prepubescent girls. It is not uncommon for ultrasound sessions to use intensities and durations far above those used in the Chinese studies.

Jim has done the math and graphically illustrates the evidence, for example, the following graphic comparison of Western critical studies and Chinese studies in terms of durations to damage, when subjected to the average device intensity for a common diagnostic ultrasound session in B-mode. These durations are approximated extrapolations.




Synergy Model

 

 

Jim's ultrasound causation model is fully compatible with the vaccine model, as it includes the concept of toxic synergy. Ultrasound is a powerful synergist, capable of initiating fetal vulnerabilities to subsequent toxic exposure. Thus the risk of subsequent exposure to vaccines, birth drugs, antibiotics and other environmental stressors would be raised by prenatal ultrasound, not in addition, but as a multiplier.

 

Bibliography with Commentary

 

 

1) Supports Western critics who have long argued that ultrasound contributes to various neonatal and childhood diseases, and neurological epidemics such as ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder) and eye diseases.

2) Supports and revives earlier Western animal studies that are critical of ultrasound, yet had been rejected or ignored.

3) Enables arguments for novel disease causation models, for example, chorioamnionitis, neonatal jaundice, bone and tissue malformation, immune dysfunction, and a wide variety of diseases related to broad-spectrum hormonal dysfunction.

The Bibliography is available in three formats:
color paperback, black/white paperback, and eBook.


The e-book can be read from any computer, Smartphone, or Kindle device. The eBook is advantageous, not only with respect to its portability, but because it provides hyperlinked accessibility to the numerous references listed in the Bibliography. The eBook is in color. The paperback is in color or black/white. The color paperback is costly due to the printer's price rules. The black and white paperback reads very well.

For further information, contact harvoa.org



References

 

[1] “Fetal Ultrasound”, John Hopkins Medicine Health Library. [URL]
[2] National Institute of Health, “Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging in Pregnancy: NIH Consensus Development Conference Statement” (February 6, 1984), [URL]
[3] Sarah L. Cibull, BS, Gerald R. Harris, PhD, and Diane M. Nell, PhD. “Trends in Diagnostic Ultrasound Acoustic Output From Data Reported to the US Food and Drug Administration for Device Indications That Include Fetal Applications.” J Ultrasound Med 32 (2013): 1921–32.




About the Author

 

Jim West is known for his original research published June 2000 in The Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients, where he introduced the pesticide/polio paradigm and unearthed relevant research arcana. His work found its way into several professional books, journals, and websites. It has been used as a powerful argument against vaccine paradigms. In 2001, ABC News journalist and producer, Nicholas Regush, extensively reviewed Jim's research into environmental causation for West Nile epidemics, gaining a strong readership response. Jim resides in New York City, where he is a member of the NoSpray Coalition which litigated against NYC helicopter pesticide spraying programs, and he is a member of Greenspeakers, an environmental Toastmasters group.



The Dark Side Of Prenatal Ultrasound With Jeanice Barcelo from Jeanice Barcelo on Vimeo.
Jeanice Barcelo, author of "Birth Trauma and the Dark Side of Modern Medicine," interviewed on the Crazz files about her forthcoming book -- "The Truth About Ultrasound." Adam and Garth Crabb do an excellent job of asking questions and providing their own insights into this dangerous technology now being used as a weapon against Mankind to attack and alter incoming children while they are still in the womb.

Adam and Garth Crabb website: http://crazzfiles.com



Disclaimer

 

Those seeking medical advice should consult medical professionals. The reader should consult trusted professionals to clarify and verify related issues. The author is not an authority. His research addresses apparent contradictions and is designed for discussion. [N.I. Ed notes: 'medical professionals' are a last resort, to be avoided at all costs - see link below]

Jim West has released his unprecedented Bibliography of ultrasound research, as a book, available at harvoa.org. “His meticulous analysis... has turned the establishment on its head...” says Jon Rappoport.




For more information about dangerous medicine see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/medical%20malpractice
- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section


Hope you like this not for profit site -
It takes hours of work every day by a genuinely incapacitated invalid to maintain, write, edit, research, illustrate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest
Like what we do? Please give anything you can -  
Contribute any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
(You can use a card securely if you don’t use Paypal)
Please click below -



Spare Bitcoin change?


Xtra Image – https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2f/CRL_Crown_rump_lengh_12_weeks_ecografia_Dr._Wolfgang_Moroder.jpg


For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ the top left of http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see


 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel -  https://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/playlists

New Illuminati’s OWN Youtube Videos -  
New Illuminati on Google+ @ For New Illuminati posts - https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RamAyana0/posts

New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati


New Illuminations –Art(icles) by R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com



DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further!

This site is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged - if you give attribution to the work & author and include all links in the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution!

If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible worlds…


From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

Wednesday, 30 October 2013

Ultrasound Causes Brain Damage in Foetuses


Ultrasound Causes Brain Damage in Foetuses

http://062013.imgbb.ru/community/110/1102087/0d43a96a0fadceb372be0f33ed6b5ab3.jpg

Ultrasound has become routine during pregnancy over the last 3 decades. It is assumed to be safe, though safety was never investigated. Research is now finally being done, and the results are dismal, demonstrating clear and permanent brain damage, as shown in this study. Nearly all babies have been damaged to varying degrees, resulting in abnormal neurology becoming the norm.



by Heidi Stevenson

That delightful ultrasound look at a fetus months before birth is a huge thrill—but that’s the only benefit. That thrill comes at a risk, one that it’s hard to imagine any parent would be willing to take if the facts were presented. Ultrasound causes brain damage and can even kill the fetus. This is not a supposition. It’s been clearly documented, and exactly what it does to the developing brain is understood.

Dr. Jennifer Margulis points out in her brilliant new book, The Business of Baby:

Manuel Casanova M.D., a neurologist who holds an endowed chair at the University of Louisville in Kentucky, contends that Rakic’s mice research helps confirm a disturbing hypothesis that he and his colleagues have been testing for the last three years: that ultrasound exposure is an environmental factor directly contributing to the exponential rise in autism.[1]

 

The Study

 

Dr. Pasko Rakic is the lead researcher for the study documenting that ultrasound damages mouse brains.[2] It shows that the process of brain development is disturbed in mice. Though it’s easy to suggest that this is “only” a study on mice, so doesn’t prove anything about humans, that’s not true. The method of development in mouse brains is exactly the same in all mammals. Therefore, if ultrasound has an adverse effect on mouse brains, then it must also have the same effect on human brains.

 
The Brain’s Cellular Organization
 
Brain cells are not arranged in a random manner. The brain’s gray matter controls muscles, sensory perception, emotion, and memory. Gray matter cells form columns, which can function as a unit. The cells are also arranged in rows that are parallel to the surface of the brain. You can think of the brain’s cells as being arranged in a grid, like a graph. Each cell forms part of both a column and a row, though the row is actually curved to match the surface of the brain.

If developing cells do not end up where they should, behavioral problems and epilepsy can arise from the misarrangement. It’s obvious that anything capable of causing such misarrangement can produce disabilities. Therefore, Dr. Rakic’s study is particularly disturbing.

 
Brain Cell Migration
 
A fetus’s neurons are formed in the area just above the cerebellum, sometimes called the “primitive brain”, and they progress toward the outer surface of the brain. During the process, they are moved outward, parallel to the brain’s surface. The study report goes into some detail about how this process happens, but for our purposes, there’s no need to address it.

How and when this process occurs is well understood, though the means by which cells move radially, away from the column in which they start, is not well understood. What is known, though, is that the process is very sensitive and can be affected by many biological, physical, and chemical agents. The authors state:

For example, repeated exposure of the rodent and primate fetal brain to environmental
agents, such as alcohol (9), drugs (22), neurotrophic viruses (23), and ionizing irradiation (24, 25), causes misplacement of neurons and behavioral deficits.


The numbers in parentheses identify study references documenting things that can result in displacement of neurons and the results.


The study provides a graphic representation of how this migration functions and malfunctions under ultrasound. The ovals represent neurons. They’re produced at the bottom, where single neurons are shown. The red ones have been labeled on day 16 of gestation. The top row (A-D) shows normal migration. The bottom row (E-H) shows abnormal migration of red (BrdU-labeled) neurons that were formed on day 16 of gestation, when ultrasound was applied.

The left-hand images (A & E) show day 16 of gestation (E16). The next ones (B & F) show day 17 of gestation (E17). The last images (D & H) show the final placement of neurons at birth (P1).

Notice that all the red neurons on the top row move upward in a consistent manner and form a single row (A-D). However, neurons that have received ultrasound often move at slower rates (F). The next batch of neurons catches up with many of them (G). The result of the the neurons receiving ultrasound, shown in red, are often displaced, with some not even reaching the cortex of the brain on the day of birth (H).


Sound Waves Equivalent to Human Fetus Exposure

http://www.childrenshospital.org/~/media/KidsMD/Conditions%20and%20Illnesses/Congenital%20Heart%20Defects/ultrasound300x197.ashx

Pregnant mice were given doses of ultrasound for times ranging from 5 to 420 minutes. As shown in the image to the right, the pregnant mice were placed in glass tubes with cutouts to deliver ultrasound to their fetuses. An acoustic gel was applied to the posterior half of the mouse and a water bag was placed on the side opposite the ultrasound device to minimize any sound wave reflection or standing waves that could affect the ultrasound application.

An ultrasound device that had been used on humans. Extensive testing was done to avoid interference and assure that the exposure of fetuses to the ultrasound was minimal. The results of these tests are provided by the authors on the publisher’s site.

The label on the graphic reading “tsp” stands for tissue standoff pad. The head of the ultrasound device was placed a distance from the mouse’s skin to assure that the fetuses received sound waves equivalent to those that a human fetus receives.

 
Method
 
146 mice were treated with ultrasound and 141 controls were run through exactly the same process, but without actually receiving ultrasound. Another 30 mice were also included as “normal” controls, but we’ll ignore them because they don’t affect the primary results.

On the 16th day of their pregnancies, the mice were injected with BrdU, which stained only the newly produced cells. The mice were treated with ultrasound on days 17-19, the 3 days following BrdU injection.  All samples were processed by technicians blinded to their control-ultrasound status.

On day 10 after birth, the young mice were killed and brain slices were taken for analysis. These were stained and processed, then viewed under microscropes, photographed, and analyzed. Grids, which the researchers called bins, were drawn on top of images to aid in the analyses.


The results of a 60 minute exposure is shown in this graphic. The control is on the left, labeled A, C, D, and E. The results of the mouse that had received ultrasound is on the right, labeled B, F, G, and H. The top two images show the locations of the slices.


Neurons stained green with BrdU, which means they were newly formed on the 16th day after conception, and the others are stained red. The six images below A and B are photos of the slices.

Images C and F show only the red stained neurons, which pre-existed the green-stained BrdU neurons.

The middle images, D and G, show the same information as C and F, but with the green BrdU-stained neurons added in. It’s easy to see that the control neurons are more clustered at the top of the cortex than those of the ultrasound-treated neurons in green.

Look at images E and H. Here, the difference between controls and ultrasound-treated neurons is even more obvious. Only the neurons that had been stained green with BrdU are shown. Notice that nearly all the control neurons made their way to level 3 or 4 of the 10 bins. Far fewer of the ultrasound-treated neurons reached levels 3 and 4. A large number reached only levels 5 and 6. Worse, though, a significant proportion hardly moved upward at all, remaining stuck at levels 1 and 2.

Finally, notice the arrow heads in H. One is in bin 7 and two are in bin 10. Bin 7 is located below the cortex. It’s in a deeper white matter area. These neurons did not even reach the cortex. Worse, though, are all these ultrasound-treated neurons still sitting in the bottom layer, a particularly worrisome situation. The study states that these neurons:

… formed a distinct band near the lateral cerebral ventricle that resemble periventricular ectopias. When these ectopic BrdU cells occurred, it was easy to distinguish the exposed brains from the control brains, even upon visual inspection of the immunostained sections.

Ectopias are abnormal positions of body parts or organs, especially at birth. These ectopias were so severe that they can be seen without a microscope—an indication of severe brain damage.

 
Quantitative Analysis
 
The example above is a single sample from the study, but there were 287 mice in it. The numbers for each of the exposure times were:

  • 420 minutes: 7 controls, 7 received ultrasound

  • 210 minutes: 14 controls, 14 received ultrasound

  • 60 minutes: 32 controls, 29 received ultrasound

  • 30 minutes: 35 controls, 35 received ultrasound

  • 15 minutes: 33 controls, 39 received ultrasound

  • 5 minutes: 20 controls, 22 received ultrasound




The graphs display the percent of neurons that remained in the bottom five bins, numbers 6-10, which means that they traveled less distance toward the brain’s surface.

Unfortunately, the 210 minute results are anomalous and the researchers offer no explanation. However, close examination shows some support for it. The percentage of 60-minute control mouse neurons that remained in bins 6-10 is less than for 30 minutes. It may be that something happens in the 30-210 minute exposure range that results in a variance.

The dispersion of neurons is similar for controls and ultrasound-exposed mice at 5 and 15 minutes, though there was a slightly higher dispersal amount in the ultrasound-exposed mice. At 30 minutes, though, the distinction starts to become significant:

  • More than 30 minutes’ exposure: 4% more neurons in bottom 5 bins (5% & 9%)

  • More than 60 minutes’ exposure: 6% more neurons in bottom 5 bins (5% & 11%)

  • More than 210 minutes’ exposure: 4% more neurons in bottom 5 bins (5% & 9%)

  • More than 420 minute’s exposure: 6% more neurons in bottom 5 bins (9% & 13%)

  • Average of all results: 3% more neurons in bottom 5 bins (5% & 8%)

Clearly, longer ultrasound exposure results in more neurons getting left behind.

As the authors wrote:

At durations of 420 min, it is possible that the stress of this long exposure leads to increased cell dispersion above the normal control condition. However, it is difficult to completely assess durations of 420 min and above because some pups from USW-exposed mothers were either resorbed or cannibalized at birth (Table 1). In fact, no pups survived to P10 [10 days after birth] in pregnant mice exposed to 600 min of USW, although the sham control mouse gave birth to a full litter that survived until P10.

Put simply, they were saying that when mouse pups were exposed to 420 minutes of ultrasound, some of them did not survive. They were either absorbed before birth or born dead or nonviable, and therefore cannibalized by their mothers. They also subjected some mouse fetuses to 600 minutes of ultrasound. None of the fetuses survived that much ultrasound exposure. All died by the 10th day after birth. However, none of the fetuses of the control group died.

 

Partial Conclusion

 

This study shows that ultrasound waves directed at a fetus interfere with brain development by causing displacement of neurons. Such displacement is known to result in behavioral problems and are either known or suspected of causing other neurological problems.

Dr. Rakic and his team have produced a powerful study that clearly demonstrates brain damage produced by ultrasound. This prenatal test has become so routine that some doctors do screenings at every visit. Though individual procedures don’t take 3½ to 7 hours (210-420 minutes), it’s easy to see that a baby could easily be exposed to an aggregate of that much. Such results need to be taken seriously.

There’s even more to know about ultrasound during pregnancy—such as the fact that it doesn’t even produce any benefits. This, and more about prenatal ultrasound are discussed in the next article, Ultrasound Causes Brain Damage in Fetuses: Implications.

I highly recommend Dr. Margulis’ book, The Business of Baby, which will soon be reviewed here on Gaia Health –Heidi Stevenson:

Sources:

1.     The Business of Baby; Dr. Jennifer Margulis; Scribner; page 25-44.
2.     Prenatal exposure to ultrasound waves impacts neuronal migration in miceProceedings of the National Academy of Science; Eugenius S. B. C,. Ang, Jr, Vicko Gluncic, Alvaro Duque, Mark E. Schafer, and Pasko Rakic.


From Gaia Health @ http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2013-10-11/ultrasound-causes-brain-damage-in-fetuses/

For more information about the dangers of ultrasound see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/ultrasound  
- See ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section


This is a ‘not for profit’ site operated by an invalid -
But if you like what we do please buy us a meal or drink if you can
Donate any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
Please -


Xtra images - http://062013.imgbb.ru/community/110/1102087/0d43a96a0fadceb372be0f33ed6b5ab3.jpg


For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


And see




 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed


New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati


The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com


The Prince of Centraxis - http://centraxis.blogspot.com (Be Aware! This link leads to implicate & xplicit concepts & images!)



DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further! This site is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original (along with this or a similar notice).
Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper!


From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com