- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>No to frivolous snaps of womb
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I REFER to last Saturday's article, '3D snapshots from the womb'.
While I am all for the use of 3D or 4D ultrasound to detect foetal abnormalities, I read with dismay about the increasing number of pregnant couples who sought 3D ultrasound photos and videos of their unborn child without any firm medical indication. I object to the frivolous use of 3D scans for purely social reasons, for example to see what the foetus looks like, for the following reasons:
Animal studies suggest some degree of chromosomal disturbance in the prolonged use of intense ultrasound waves;
3D scans, using ultrasound wave intensities much more powerful than in 2D scans, have not been used long enough for possible adverse long-terms effects to be apparent in the unborn child;
Unnecessary scans drive up medical costs for society; and
This whole practice of social scanning smacks of consumerism, with no medical benefit to the patient.
Although the potential risk to the unborn child is small, no one can guarantee that, years down the road, there may not be an increase in conditions like Alzheimer's disease or behavioural problems with excessive ultrasound exposure. I therefore urge all pregnant women to seriously consider the potential hazards of 3D scans before asking for these scans to be performed when there is no medical indication. Dr Gordon Tan
Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist
Gleneagles Medical Centre
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I REFER to last Saturday's article, '3D snapshots from the womb'.
While I am all for the use of 3D or 4D ultrasound to detect foetal abnormalities, I read with dismay about the increasing number of pregnant couples who sought 3D ultrasound photos and videos of their unborn child without any firm medical indication. I object to the frivolous use of 3D scans for purely social reasons, for example to see what the foetus looks like, for the following reasons:
Animal studies suggest some degree of chromosomal disturbance in the prolonged use of intense ultrasound waves;
3D scans, using ultrasound wave intensities much more powerful than in 2D scans, have not been used long enough for possible adverse long-terms effects to be apparent in the unborn child;
Unnecessary scans drive up medical costs for society; and
This whole practice of social scanning smacks of consumerism, with no medical benefit to the patient.
Although the potential risk to the unborn child is small, no one can guarantee that, years down the road, there may not be an increase in conditions like Alzheimer's disease or behavioural problems with excessive ultrasound exposure. I therefore urge all pregnant women to seriously consider the potential hazards of 3D scans before asking for these scans to be performed when there is no medical indication. Dr Gordon Tan
Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist
Gleneagles Medical Centre
