Aspies For Freedom

Full Version: Crazy Autism Causes: Ultrasound Scans
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Exposure to ultrasound can affect fetal brain development, a new study suggests. But researchers say the findings, in mice, should not discourage pregnant women from having ultrasound scans for medical reasons.

When pregnant mice were exposed to ultrasound, a small number of nerve cells in the developing brains of their fetuses failed to extend correctly in the cerebral cortex.

"Our study in mice does not mean that use of ultrasound on human fetuses for appropriate diagnostic and medical purposes should be abandoned," said lead researcher Pasko Rakic, chairman of the neurobiology department at Yale University School of Medicine.

However, he added in a telephone interview, women should avoid unnecessary ultrasound scans until more research has been done.

Dr. Joshua Copel, president-elect of the American Institute of Ultrasound Medicine, said his organization tries to discourage "entertainment" ultrasound, but considers sonograms important when there is a medical benefit.

"Anytime we're doing an ultrasound we have to think of risk vs. benefit. What clinical question are we trying to answer," Copel said in a telephone interview. "It may be very important to know the exact dating of pregnancy, it's certainly helpful to know the anatomy of the fetus, but we shouldn't be holding a transducer on mom's abdomen for hours and hours and hours."

Rakic's paper said that while the effects of ultrasound in human brain development are not yet known, there are disorders thought to be the result of misplacement of brain cells during their development.

"These disorders range from mental retardation and childhood epilepsy to developmental dyslexia, autism spectrum disorders and schizophrenia," the researchers said.

Their report is in Tuesday's edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Early ultrasound scans are done to determine the exact week of the pregnancy and they are also done later to check for anatomical defects and other problems.

However, some expectant parents have sought scans to save as keepsakes even when they were not medically necessary, a practice the Food and Drug Administration discourages.

The Institute of Ultrasound Medicine was particularly concerned last year when it was announced that actor Tom Cruise had purchased an ultrasound machine for his pregnant fiancee, Katie Holmes, so they could do their own sonograms.

"Purchase of an ultrasound machine for private, at home use entails inappropriate operation of a prescription medical device designed for diagnostic use by a trained medical professional," the group said in a statement issued at the time.

Copel, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Yale University School of Medicine, did point out that there are large differences between scanning mice and scanning people.

For example, because of their size, the distance between the scanner and the fetus is larger in people than mice, which reduces the intensity of the ultrasound. In addition, he said, the density of the cranial bones in a human baby is more than that of a tiny mouse, which further reduces exposure to the scan.

The paper noted that the developmental period of these brain cells is much longer in humans than in mice, so that exposure would be a smaller percentage of their developmental period.

However, it also pointed out that brain cell development in people is more complex and there are more cells developing, which could increase the chances of some going astray.

In Rakic's study, pregnant mice were exposed to ultrasound for various amounts of time ranging from a total exposure of 5 minutes to 420 minutes. After the baby mice were born their brains were studied and compared with those of mice whose mothers had not been exposed to ultrasound.

The study of 335 mice concluded that in those whose mothers were exposed to a total of 30 minutes or more, "a small but statistically significant number" of brain cells failed to grow into their proper position and remained scattered in incorrect parts of the brain. The number of affected cells increased with longer exposures.

By Randolph E. Schmid, Associated Press
He doesn't say it causes autism, but the journalist writes it in such a way as it that he seems to imply a correlation.  What is interesting is that this seems to be another one of those "silly season" newspaper stories in which bored journalists collude with publicity-seeking scienticists to "re-discover" old news that has already been reported...

This is from 2001, reporting a major paper in the journal Epidemiology...

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1670

(Oh, and by the way... I didn't have ultrasound before I was born. But it was a very cold winter...  :lol: )
M wrote:

Quote:
Autism is the new kid on the block and every clinician wants to make a diagnosis! It used to be that schizophrenia and bi-polar were tops.

Jeez, it's like people think anything that interferes with brain cells causes autism. I strongly disagree. I think that autism is simply just caused by excessive brain cells that only work if the skull is enlarged. That is why so many aspies are so darn intellegent. But if the skull is an average sized skull, the brain will be too packed in to be able to function, so mental retardation develops. This theory totally makes sense to me. I think ultrasound probably caused something else.

>This theory totally makes sense to me.

Interesting idea, but don't you think medical researchers would have noticed such a blindingly obvious difference by now?

Futurilla Wrote:
>This theory totally makes sense to me.

Interesting idea, but don't you think medical researchers would have noticed such a blindingly obvious difference by now?


This idea has been discovered by medical researchers. However, many people still believe other garbage, such as the theory about mercury connecting to autism. Autism is caused by genetics, not the enviroment (or, at least I don't think so). Look at this thread and you will see more about this brain enlargement theory: http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/phpBB2/v...php?t=4119

Very interesting! I hadn't known about this study before. Although diagnosing autism in babies only a month or two old ...

Quote:
"This burst of overgrowth takes place in a brief period of time, between about two months and six to 14 months of age,"


... must be very difficult.  I assume therefore that these must have been severely autistic babies at the bottom of the low-functioning spectrum?

I would still assume, however, that the corpses of adults with autism which had been left to medical research would have been quickly identified as having had a more "closely packed" brain than normal people.  If that was the case.

With respect to the tangent:  I thought it was more than theory that Autistic brains are "larger" than NT?  With a spurt of more rapid growth?  I thought well respected studies concluded that a while back?

It has always struck me as funny that shortly before my son was tentatively diagnosed, he told me one day that he had figured out what his problem was:  "my brain is too big, mom."

As for ultrasounds, I think we have to look at the whole spectrum of unnatural things our kids are exposed to.  This is just one more.  I don't believe they cause autism, for I am firmly in the genetic cause camp, but I could see environmental issues making the condition stronger or more obvious.
I love how they "discover" new causes for things that predate the supposed causes by decades, even millenia.  

All these things they cited have been around for thousands of years, it's just that more recently people have known the names for them.  It's like they think that something cannot exist if it doesn't have a name.  Somebody identifies a series of traits that have existed for thousands of years and are well-known, then suddenly now there's a single word for it there's an epidemic.
Aspie 44.8 you're right. Sorry to be so skeptical, but there are so many "folk beliefs" around us. I went looking and found several scientific papers...

Quote:
The majority of autistics have slightly enlarged brain size, compared to normal people. Neurology Today (Volume 2,8: August 2002) stated that "Although it is accepted that autistic individuals have, on average, an enlarged brain size, the nature of this abnormality remains unknown.".


I also found a paper "Brain Volume in Autism" which had suveryed aspies of a normal learning ability /  IQ, and which found strongly measurable differences.
http://www.wpic.pitt.edu/research/CeFAR/...autism.pdf

So, I now wonder why have I never heard about this factor before, and why it does not seem to be mentioned in factors used in diagnosis?

aspie44.8 Wrote:

Futurilla Wrote:
>This theory totally makes sense to me.

Interesting idea, but don't you think medical researchers would have noticed such a blindingly obvious difference by now?


This idea has been discovered by medical researchers. However, many people still believe other garbage, such as the theory about mercury connecting to autism. Autism is caused by genetics, not the enviroment (or, at least I don't think so).


Actually, it's more refined than "brain enlargement".  The hypothesis is of an adverse reaction to brain hypertrophy, whether that be expressed as a "large" brain on the gross anatomical scale or not.  The hypertrophy, itself, need not be whole-brain.  Likewise, simplistically determining that it is all "genetics" or all "environment" is just that--simplistic.

ConLang Wrote:
I love how they "discover" new causes for things that predate the supposed causes by decades, even millenia.  

All these things they cited have been around for thousands of years, it's just that more recently people have known the names for them.  It's like they think that something cannot exist if it doesn't have a name.  Somebody identifies a series of traits that have existed for thousands of years and are well-known, then suddenly now there's a single word for it there's an epidemic.


yeah , i am not sure why "discoveries" in the new century are no longer groundbreaking, instead more along the lines of grave robbing.
(i.e. reworking something which had already been explained)
as you said.

;)

Quote:
The Institute of Ultrasound Medicine was particularly concerned last year when it was announced that actor Tom Cruise had purchased an ultrasound machine for his pregnant fiancee, Katie Holmes, so they could do their own sonograms.

"Purchase of an ultrasound machine for private, at home use entails inappropriate operation of a prescription medical device designed for diagnostic use by a trained medical professional," the group said in a statement issued at the time.


Well, this much at least is true. Even trained ultrasound technicians can misread a sonogram; someone with no training on ultrasound machines and limited medical knowledge won't even be able to tell the difference between the baby's heart and it's bladder.

Star Trek Nerd Girl Wrote:
Well, this much at least is true. Even trained ultrasound technicians can misread a sonogram; someone with no training on ultrasound machines and limited medical knowledge won't even be able to tell the difference between the baby's heart and it's bladder.


Yeps. I can confirm that is true. Based on an Ultrasound scan, the doctors told my wife and I that our son had fused wind and food pipe, no stomach, no functioning kidney, deformed face and deformed genitals. They gave him just a 30% chance of surviving the pregnancy and strongly suggested an abortion.

Robert is now 2 (almost 3) years old. Yes, one kidney had to be removed, but that runs in my wife's family. Yes, he is Autistic, but that runs in my family. His face is angelic and with no deformation (neither are his genitals deformed in any way). A healthy and happy toddler - with none of the life-threatening problems the doctors predicted.

Noctivagus Wrote:
They gave him just a 30% chance of surviving the pregnancy and strongly suggested an abortion.

Robert is now 2 (almost 3) years old. Yes, one kidney had to be removed, but that runs in my wife's family. Yes, he is Autistic, but that runs in my family. His face is angelic and with no deformation (neither are his genitals deformed in any way). A healthy and happy toddler - with none of the life-threatening problems the doctors predicted.


I have a problem with doctors.  Apart from surviving for forty years being treated for a variety of symptoms by them when I had a treatable but undiagnosed comorbid condition, my pregnancy with Lauren was not picked up by the doctor until I was into the second trimester!  True, my comorbid makes even diagnosing pregnancy problematic, but my symptoms were all of pregnancy.  I eventually had to demand an ultrasound to prove to them that I was, as I'd suspected for three months, pregnant.  (Because the urine and blood tests showed negative, all the other pregnancy symptoms were disregarded.)

Alison (doctors - don't talk to me about doctors!@#$%^&*)

Reference URL's