Reply Hey Mom! Learn more about the Gerber Life Insurance Grow-Up Plan!
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-05-2012, 07:46 PM   #11
s@hmommy
Registered Users
seller
seller
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,407
Re: Should we do the anatomy scan?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KelseyH View Post
Based on the high rate of false diagnoses in addition to the risk of ultrasound itself (especially when you have already had several) I, personally, would decline. If you are planning a home birth, there are very few things that you have to worry about that would need immediate medical attention. If you are birthing in a hospital, then I assume that would bring a measure of security that would cause you to worry even less. I have seen too many friends/family stress and worry about false diagnoses of heart or kidney defects, supposed "complete" placenta previa, etc - only to have a perfectly normal delivery and a totally healthy babe. We are declining any further ultrasounds during this pregnancy and will do so with future children, barring trauma like a car accident or excessive bleeding or something equally terrible.

I have a TON of research compiled on ultrasound, some of which are statistics on false diagnoses. If you'd be interested in seeing it, I'd be happy to email you the word document. Just pm me!

ETA: ultrasound is NOT non-invasive. During an ultrasound, baby is exposed to non-ionized radiation, heat, and excessively loud noise. That is why you hear so often of babies "hiding" from ultrasounds - they are trying to escape the pain! Ultrasound on a baby can cause cavitation, sinistrality, IUGR, and preterm labor, among MANY other things. The same ultrasound used on babies is used to dissolve kidney stones and the same exposure to a man's testicles can sterilize him for six months or more. What is that power doing to your baby? Not worth the risk IMO.
Do you have links for those last statements? I know that the ultrasound used to dissolve kidney stones is at a much higher frequency than that used for diagnostic ultrasound, so it is really not the same. I am curios about the rest though.

Advertisement

s@hmommy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 07:47 PM   #12
bumminbeachbabe's Avatar
bumminbeachbabe
Registered Users
seller
seller
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,346
Re: Should we do the anatomy scan?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KelseyH View Post
Based on the high rate of false diagnoses in addition to the risk of ultrasound itself (especially when you have already had several) I, personally, would decline. If you are planning a home birth, there are very few things that you have to worry about that would need immediate medical attention. If you are birthing in a hospital, then I assume that would bring a measure of security that would cause you to worry even less. I have seen too many friends/family stress and worry about false diagnoses of heart or kidney defects, supposed "complete" placenta previa, etc - only to have a perfectly normal delivery and a totally healthy babe. We are declining any further ultrasounds during this pregnancy and will do so with future children, barring trauma like a car accident or excessive bleeding or something equally terrible.

I have a TON of research compiled on ultrasound, some of which are statistics on false diagnoses. If you'd be interested in seeing it, I'd be happy to email you the word document. Just pm me!

ETA: ultrasound is NOT non-invasive. During an ultrasound, baby is exposed to non-ionized radiation, heat, and excessively loud noise. That is why you hear so often of babies "hiding" from ultrasounds - they are trying to escape the pain! Ultrasound on a baby can cause cavitation, sinistrality, IUGR, and preterm labor, among MANY other things. The same ultrasound used on babies is used to dissolve kidney stones and the same exposure to a man's testicles can sterilize him for six months or more. What is that power doing to your baby? Not worth the risk IMO.
Do you have links? As I understood it the ultrasound waves used to break up kidney stones are not the same level as those used in routine ultrasounds on a fetus.
__________________
Anjuli, recently separated mom to Bubbles, my 5.5 year old wild man, Squidge, my almost 3 year old daredevil, and Lou, my 7 month old newbie
bumminbeachbabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 07:47 PM   #13
songbird516's Avatar
songbird516
Registered Users
seller
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,164
My Mood:
Re: Should we do the anatomy scan?

We did the 22 week ultrasound, and that was the only one and pretty much the only test. I think that it's worth the risk just to make sure that everything in developing normally. I know that they aren't 100% reliable, but we did have a homebirth and I'd rather know as much information as possible. I think it's good to take the ultrasound with a grain of salt, but for us, it was worth the risk.
__________________
Sara- mommy to Claire (01/10) and Micah (3/12) and someone new (10/14)
Birth doula and life-long student of Everything! Need a doula in the central VA area? Let's talk! www.beyondbirthsupport.com
songbird516 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 07:48 PM   #14
s@hmommy
Registered Users
seller
seller
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,407
Re: Should we do the anatomy scan?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bumminbeachbabe View Post
Do you have links? As I understood it the ultrasound waves used to break up kidney stones are not the same level as those used in routine ultrasounds on a fetus.
They aren't, I just looked it up because I was under the same impression.
s@hmommy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 08:05 PM   #15
deely's Avatar
deely
Registered Users
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 44
We decline almost all testing, including cervical checks, but we do the 20 week ultrasound because we're planning to birth at an out-of-hospital birthing center. If there is something that could be wrong, we need to know ahead of time so we can change our birth location.
I know that ultrasounds are not completely risk free, but at the same time, I think that 2 ultrasounds over the course of a pregnancy to determine if there is anything in advance we need to plan for is worth it. That is our family's choice and its going to be different for everyone. Do what will make you feel the most calm.
deely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 08:09 PM   #16
kushie tushie's Avatar
kushie tushie
Registered Users
seller
seller
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 8,103
My Mood:
Quote:
Originally Posted by KelseyH View Post
Based on the high rate of false diagnoses in addition to the risk of ultrasound itself (especially when you have already had several) I, personally, would decline. If you are planning a home birth, there are very few things that you have to worry about that would need immediate medical attention. If you are birthing in a hospital, then I assume that would bring a measure of security that would cause you to worry even less. I have seen too many friends/family stress and worry about false diagnoses of heart or kidney defects, supposed "complete" placenta previa, etc - only to have a perfectly normal delivery and a totally healthy babe. We are declining any further ultrasounds during this pregnancy and will do so with future children, barring trauma like a car accident or excessive bleeding or something equally terrible.

I have a TON of research compiled on ultrasound, some of which are statistics on false diagnoses. If you'd be interested in seeing it, I'd be happy to email you the word document. Just pm me!

ETA: ultrasound is NOT non-invasive. During an ultrasound, baby is exposed to non-ionized radiation, heat, and excessively loud noise. That is why you hear so often of babies "hiding" from ultrasounds - they are trying to escape the pain! Ultrasound on a baby can cause cavitation, sinistrality, IUGR, and preterm labor, among MANY other things. The same ultrasound used on babies is used to dissolve kidney stones and the same exposure to a man's testicles can sterilize him for six months or more. What is that power doing to your baby? Not worth the risk IMO.
We are surrounded by high fequency sound all day. Fetal ultrasound is high frequency which is an in audible sound.

DH is a sonar tech in the Navy (very knowledgable about sound) and says this is completely untrue. U/s that are used to break up kidney stones are low frequency. Humans can only hear from 20 hz-20 khc. U/s is atleast above 35 khc....so it would not be heard by the baby....

U/s does not cause cavitation...cavitation is the seperation of hydrogen and oxygen. It has nothing to do with sound. The baby would have to be kicking really friggin fast to cause bubbles.

Amanda . Blaming my phone for typos and crap.
__________________
Amanda- wife to DH. Mama to W (2010), L (2011), H (2013) & expecting #4 Jan 2016

Last edited by kushie tushie; 12-05-2012 at 08:17 PM.
kushie tushie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 08:24 PM   #17
MommaLEB's Avatar
MommaLEB
Registered Users
seller
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 546
My Mood:
Re: Should we do the anatomy scan?

It's up to you, in the end, but I wouldn't skip it. I actually hate doing it because I'm convinced someone is going to spill the beans. I'm anxious this time because of the meds. I know they're pretty safe and I need them, but I still worry it will have caused some damage.
__________________
Wife to E 10-29-05.
Mom to tougHGirl L 5-4-10
tougHGuy B 5-1-13

MommaLEB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 08:28 PM   #18
Arabesque's Avatar
Arabesque
Registered Users
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,171
My Mood:
I would do it. Having the anatomy scan could change your plans with respect to where you give birth if an anomaly is found.
__________________
Amanda - happily married wife to N and mother to B and C
Arabesque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 08:31 PM   #19
RunawayBunny's Avatar
RunawayBunny
Registered Users
seller
seller
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,185
I am personally very thankful I had an anatomy scan done. They found a probable case of complete placenta previa. It is a very over diagnosed issue at 20 weeks and will be reevaluated at 28 weeks. So I will probably be just fine, but if I had the condition and went into labor its life threatening for me and baby. Even if at 28 weeks my placenta position looks good I will be relieved and only thankful I was over prepared, not angry that I was worried for nothing. I dont want to find out I have placenta previa by having massive bleeding and an emergency c-sec.
RunawayBunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2012, 08:33 PM   #20
KelseyH's Avatar
KelseyH
Registered Users
seller
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,233
I will be happy to email what I have to anyone interested if you send me a pm with your address! I am on my phone currently and getting ready to go to bed, so I don't have links/studies handy.
I think if it was such a non-issue as some make it out to be, the FDA wouldn't be worried about it. Even they say to limit U/S exposure, and they are also the ones who recommend injecting your body with mercury and fetal cells. so logically anything they say to be cautious about? Is probably pretty serious.
KelseyH is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Copyright 2005 - 2014 Escalate Media. All Rights Reserved.