Autism Vox

43 opinions for This is a theory: Autism and ultrasound

• Lisa/Jedi
  Nov 14, 2006 at 4:31 pm

  Back on the merry-go-round or theories posed by non-scientists…

  For the record, B was never exposed to a sonogram. I had no prenatal testing at all, in fact (we wanted him just as he was…).

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Nov 14, 2006 at 4:48 pm

  I had one and you can tell it’s Charlie—something about the shape of his head……

• Joseph
  Nov 14, 2006 at 4:48 pm

  This is another one of those theories where they start with the assumption “there has been an epidemic of autism” and then they ask the question “let’s see what has been on an upward trend lately…” Unsubstantiated assumptions will naturally lead to unlikely hypotheses.

• Ian Parker
  Nov 15, 2006 at 8:31 pm

  Maybe it is not the ultrasound but the increased time spent in waiting rooms for all of these procedures? Perhaps Joe Pennacchio should work on legislating wait times downward, just in case that has a beneficial effect.

• Assemblyman Pennacchio
  Nov 24, 2006 at 1:38 pm

  I understand the level of cynaism, however the proposed legislation directs the New Jersey State Department of Health to colate and if necessary commission an epidemiological study to investigate any possible relation between autism and sonogram use. The bill is measured, reasonable, and a responsable approach to this important issue. As a side note similar, however unpublished studies were replicated using primates.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Nov 24, 2006 at 1:51 pm

  Thank you very much for responding here, Assemblyman Pennacchio. In your capacity as both a politician and a medical professional in the field of dentistry, we hope that you might keep in mind the tendency of the public and in particular of parents—especially of autistic children—and of parents-to-be to read about such studies and assume that they are factual. Please keep us informed about the results of the epidemiological study.

• Autism Vox » Be careful when you conceive: Another theory of what causes autism
  Dec 30, 2006 at 12:10 am

  […] align=”left” > 2006 having brought us a number of “interesting” theories of what causes autism—-TV, ultrasounds, infertility, older dads—I will add one more such theory to the pile: Time of conception. […]

• Sue Cranston
  Jan 19, 2007 at 3:51 pm

  I found an article recently (see link below) that is obviously written by someone with a strong opinion on the subject already - but, I do at least find it valuable that ALL of her claims are backed up with citations to specific studies. It may be valuable to examine the very long list of what appear to be legitimate scientific studies to determine the context of the author’s comments -

  http://www.midwiferytoday.com/articles/ultrasoundrodgers.asp

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jan 19, 2007 at 4:48 pm

  Thanks for the reference, Sue!

• Autism Vox » Sure, there’s an autism epidemic (but watch your words)
  Jan 20, 2007 at 4:49 am

  […] “The pervasive use of prenatal ultrasound, which can cause potentially dangerous thermal effects” is presented as a cause of autism by Rodgers (I posted previously about autism and ultrasound on November 14, 2006.) Rodgers cites numerous research studies concerning damage “consistent with that found in the brains of people with autism” in the brains of mice whose pregnant mothers had been exposed to ultrasound, as well as birth defects that have been shown to be the result of “elevated maternal or fetal body temperatures” (Rodgers cites a 2004 warning from the FDA concerning a rise in temperature in tissue from ultrasound; she also notes how the use of saunas and hot tubs can elevate maternal body temperature). She refers to studies of autism in twins and asks “could this increased twin risk factor [for autism] have to do with the practice of giving mothers with multiple gestations more ultrasounds than those expecting single births” and calls for more “serious consideration” to be given to the effects of prenatal ultrasound, over and beyond genetics. She cites research discounting an MMR/autism link and also a mercury/autism link, and points out that, even though thimerasol has been eliminated from childhood vaccines, “ASD increases are between 10 to 17 percent every year.” […]

• Mindy
  Jan 20, 2007 at 10:17 pm

  I am an ultrasonographer. I also have two autistic sons. While I acknowledge that what we learn from obstetric scanning is invaluable, I think when looking at my co-workers, it might be difficult not to feel the need to investigate this further. My children were obviously exposed to more than the average amount of in utero sonography. Of note, three of my four co-workers have children with autism. (Interestingly, all specifically have Asperger’s Syndrome). The fourth co-worker has two daughters, one of which has an unspecified learning disability.

  I make my living off of ultrasound and I am passionate about the difference that I make day to day. However, the fear lingers in my mind, and I no longer scan any longer than necessary despite a parent to be’s best efforts.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jan 20, 2007 at 10:25 pm

  Mindy, your experience and perspective adds a lot—thanks so much for writing about these here; I more than appreciate it. I wrote some commentary on Sure, there’s an autism epidemic (but watch your words): On the semantics of “epidemic,” ancient and modern. If I may ask, were you and all of your co-workers doing obstretric scanning while expecting?

• Tina
  Apr 18, 2007 at 12:10 am

  I am a mother of identical twin boys one has Autism and the other doesnt.. the smaller boy was watched more fequently during ultrasounds to make sure he was developing proporly…I think its possible that it could be a cause becase.. I was high risk and was having an ultrasound every two weeks

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Apr 18, 2007 at 12:16 am

  Thanks so much for sharing about your children, Tina. Hope they are doing well.

• Dorothy
  Apr 19, 2007 at 10:42 am

  Has there been any updates on this? Is there a study being done in NJ or not. I refused an ultrasound at 6.5 weeks based on the possibility it MAY have something to do with autism, and all the staff looked at me like I was a freak and NONE of them had ever even heard of this before. They are pressuring me to have one saying they (fertility clinic) cannot refer me to a normal OB without an U/S. Why do they need to do one, why is one NECESSARY at this point? Won’t I eventually have a miscarriage if there is a blighted ovum?

• Mindy (again)
  Apr 20, 2007 at 11:51 am

  I just wanted to reassure Dorothy, the use of ultrasound without excess might very easily outweigh the possible negative effects of ultrasound. Please follow yout doctor’s advice. I work in a fertility clinic as well, and I can tell you, you may be at a higher risk, so be sure to protect the baby as much as possible.

  My concerns with autism and ultrasound stem from an overuse. For instance, I am constantly subjected to ultrasonic waves. The AIUM published their study almost as a direct statement to Tom Cruise, as he is the first personal citizen to own an ultrasound machine. As you might imagine, we are warning against excessive, unnecessary use. Simple routine screenings throughout the pregnancy are very necessary (espically in fertility cases) and often yeild much more important discoveries that could affect baby’s future.

  Also, not all women will pass a blighted ovum. Often times doctors do need to intervine. It is also nice to know that the baby exists in the uterus and not in your falliopian tubes or other places. Trust your doctors. They want the best for your baby too.

  Meanwhile, maybe steer clear of pre-natal baby photography shops and personalized ultrasound equipment in the home. Only what is necessary, but always what is necessary.

• Diane
  May 13, 2007 at 1:39 pm

  I know this will sound stupid but I need to say it anyway. Last night in a dream I was clearly told ultrasound interrupts the formation of neural pathways in the brain of the developing baby. I don’t know anything about autism, I don’t know anyone with it. I don’t know anything about ultrasound science. I don’t anything about fetal development. I had a dream that has been bothering me all day so I went to the computer to see if I could find any information. I found your site. I know this sounds crazy.

• susan
  Jul 10, 2007 at 2:23 pm

  Correlation can never be confused with cause, however—if there is a correlation, then it must be investigated– and this should be applied to any variable in the environment that shares an “upward trend” with ASD. –we ought to the kids, the parents etc.—read the history of ultrasoundand how it was utilized/expreriment with these past 80 years–I will reread for specifics but it ultrasound has
  been shown to be destructive with increased intensity. (Langevin:http://www.ob-ultrasound.net/history1.html) –for that matter, the
  timetable for vaccines (mercury aside) has been moved up for earlier shots, day of birth.
  we need to investigate any and all relevant variables.
  sue-spec. ed. teacher

• Cindy
  Aug 12, 2007 at 10:33 pm

  I have been studying brain development and neuroscience extensively for many years. Recently I have read several studies concerning the effects of ultrasound on seeds, young plants and developing crops. Very interesting! Soooo, I decided to see if there might be a body of scientific studies concerning the effects of ultrasound on the developing brain —- voila—- this website among many others. It seems logical to me that the extrasensitivity to sound waves common among children with ASD might indicate a connection to fetal ultrasound. ?? As a professor of teacher education and special education, I am passionate about exploring all possible etiologies and strategies for teaching children with ASD. Thanks for your insights. I hope to learn more!

• Pat Loeser
  Sep 20, 2007 at 11:18 am

  As a grandparent I, too, have an interest in any research regarding autism and sonograms. My daughter had serveral because of an ovarian cyst discovered while she was pregnant. In hindsight, autism symtoms were present from birth on.

• Grammy Pat
  Sep 20, 2007 at 11:56 am

  As a concerned grandparent, I have a special interest in research of any link between autism and sonograms. My daughter had several due to the discovery of an ovarian cyst during her pregnancy. In hindsight, my granddaughter had symtoms of an autism spectrum disorder from birth on.

• Christiane
  Dec 19, 2007 at 1:57 am

  If you choose *not* to have an ultrasound, be prepared to fight the so-called medical professionals on this issue. Stand your ground and don’t give in. There is ample evidence that ultrasounds have many negative effects on the developing fetus, autism being just one of them. I can’t stress this enough: Don’t agree to the ultrasound, even if you feel pressured. There is no law prohibiting you from exercising your free will on this matter. If your OBGYN refuses to take you on because you decline the ultrasound, then find another OBGYN who will accept your decision. Better yet, get in touch with a midwife who is more likely to respect your wishes. Whatever you do, don’t accept the statement: “ultrasounds are perfectly safe”. The research available to us through Medline makes it very clear that ultrasounds are *Not* proven safe. Think of the future of your child, and say “no”. It’s a difficult path to go against the norm, but a brave and honest one at that.

• Christiane
  Dec 19, 2007 at 1:59 am

  If you choose *not* to have an ultrasound, be prepared to fight the so-called medical professionals on this issue. Stand your ground and don’t give in. There is ample evidence that ultrasounds have many negative effects on the developing fetus, autism being just one of them. I can’t stress this enough: Don’t agree to the ultrasound, even if you feel pressured. There is no law prohibiting you from exercising your free will on this matter. If your OBGYN refuses to take you on because you decline the ultrasound, then find another OBGYN who will accept your decision. Better yet, get in touch with a midwife who is more likely to respect your wishes. Whatever you do, don’t accept the statement: “ultrasounds are perfectly safe”. The research available to us through Medline makes it very clear that ultrasounds are *Not* proven safe. In fact ultrasounds are dangerous. Think of the future of your child, and say “no”. It’s a difficult path to go against the norm, but a brave and honest one at that.

• Regan
  Dec 19, 2007 at 6:36 am

  It’s funny. I don’t know if everyone has a “maybe” lurking in the back of their mind…this one is mine, mostly because of some professional work that I did at one time using ultrasound and having some idea of effects, and just the fact that I had so darned many ultrasounds when pregnant. Why? Because I was older and high risk.
  So which might potentially be a greater contributor? Being older? Ultrasound? Both? Neither? Something else? Or just the genetic throw of the dice? At this point in the here and now, I don’t think about it very often.
  If there is a correlation, I don’t have a problem with it being studied, if standards of evidence analysis are used, rather than a search to “prove” a hypothesis.

• Steven
  Dec 19, 2007 at 11:36 am

  There is so much research already available, showing clear negative effects of ultrasounds on the fetus. There is an interesting post at: http://ubb.fanasylum.com/ubbthreads/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=597970&page=0&vc=1
  in which a number of studies are described. The point is, we don’t even know the long-term effects of these prenatal ultrasounds. We do know the immediate effects in both animal and human studies. I frankly cannot believe that it isn’t common knowledge that ultrasounds (particularly multiple ones) are putting unborn babies at risk. It’s a huge disservice to women around the world for doctors to order unnecessary routine ultrasounds. There is no evidence for their usefulness and a great deal of studies showing they can in some cases lead to fetal abnormalities, including abnormal brain development, restricted growth, low birth weight, compromised digestive system, and even miscarriages.
  It’s time we stand up, as researchers, patients and those in the medical profession, to protect our most vulnerable.

• Jaymee
  Jan 24, 2008 at 7:12 pm

  hi, my first two children received ultrasound in the early 80’s, just once or twice each. my third son, autistic, born in 85 received many extra ultrasounds due to an echo that they thought was two heartbeats. they kept searching for the twin.

  strange that it causes lefthandedness in boys. it is curious that ultrasound would effect boys in general more than girls, i think this might be the excuse for not studying this more. jaymee

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Jan 24, 2008 at 7:21 pm

  Jaymee, thanks for sharing about your children here—-the doctors did the extra ultrasounds only on the basis of the echo? (if you don’t mind my asking)

• Jaymee
  Jan 24, 2008 at 7:33 pm

  hi, yes. my doc was Hugh Dorian, one of the only doctors in el paso with an ultrasound machine at the time. he did ultrasounds for many of the local doctors. it was new technology, so he played around with it a bit sometimes, showed me my liver and gall bladder once.

  Ryan had lots of fluid, it flooded down the hall when my water broke. they decided that the extra fluid caused the dual heartbeats. jaymee

• vanessa
  Feb 25, 2008 at 10:12 pm

  My mother always told me when she had kids (she’s only 46) they never had ultrasounds, nor kids with autism. She has instilled in me never to get an ultrasound because she belives it is the leading cause in autism. She may be wrong, but mother’s are usually right.

• Linda
  Mar 15, 2008 at 5:04 pm

  Vanessa,
  The problem is that 20 years ago, autism was not something that was diagnosed. Back then, I was just starting school and had a friend who had learning difficulties and social interaction difficulties. They did not know what the problem was. Her parents consulted many doctors. The only “diagnoses” they got was “hyperactive”. She was not diagnosed with Asperger’s till the 90’s when autism became more widely known. It has definitely existed, but the diagnoses has become much more common and the definition much more broad.
  Just because two things increase at the same time does not mean one caused the other. There are too many theories that start out this way- a “link” has been found between how much rainfall a county gets and the levels of autism. The higher the rainfall, the higher the level of autism is found there. This was studied in California and I think Oregon and Washington. They speculated that more rain possibly meant kids watching more TV and perhaps that was part of the cause.
  It all sounds like people trying to find the magic bullet that “causes” autism. I’m not even sure if there’s a real “epidemic” when the definition of autism and autism spectrum has changed and was practically unknown 20 year ago. How can we really compare?

• Jaymee
  Mar 15, 2008 at 6:41 pm

  if autism is merely “newly diagnosed”, where are all the autistic adults and elderly people? Maybe it just started raining autism.

  The rain study is compellingly ridiculous, but Linda, have you read the research mentioned in this article?

  http://merzenich.positscience.com/2007/05/01/ultrasound-and-autism/

  I am convinced that each autistic person is uniquely so. Probably there are many causes, and varied effects as well. Maybe injecting mercury into kids isnt a good idea, it is well know that hatters go mad from contact with the stuff, so did the miners of it. Maybe it IS acid rain, though i doubt that would be true for my son since we lived out in the middle of the desert. There could even be a few refrigerator moms out there, like Sybils. i am not discounting any theory not yet studied.

  i just want to be sure that this one is. jaymee

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Mar 15, 2008 at 6:50 pm

  One answer to your question is here.

• Jaymee
  Mar 15, 2008 at 9:27 pm

  yes i did read your expose of the issue several months back; i think your point is moot. it was not the graphs that convinced me. it was this single quote that made me think the issue had some merit worth exploring:

  “Elegant studies conducted in monkeys by an eminent brain scientist at Yale (Dr. Pasko Rakic) have shown that ultrasound exams result in an alteration of the normal, detailed organization of the cerebral cortex that specifically applies for neurons that are migrating into the cortex at the time of the exposure. In other words, across roughly the 2nd trimester of pregnancy when cortical layers are being formed, you can actually determine the time of administration of the ultrasound exam post hoc, by looking at the location of abnormally oriented neurons in the layers of the cerebral cortex.”

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Mar 15, 2008 at 9:31 pm

  Thank you for reading it. Here’s Rakic’s lab; my son was born as he is. I look forward to the continuous stream of theories about autism causation, each further pointing to the “mootness” of other ones. Best wishes—-

• jaymee
  Mar 16, 2008 at 1:22 pm

  although the rise in autism relates, perhaps spuriously, to the rise in ultrasounds that isnt the reason i call for more studies. whether or not autism is rising or was merely undiagnosed as such is immaterial to my point.

  i think, based on the accumulated data, that the issue deserves further study. the 33% higher miscarriage rate is enough to convince me of that need, autism aside.

  my prior post leaves little reason to assume that i believe that each theory cancels another; which is what i assume you think the word moot means by your last post. it doesnt. moot means “purely academic” and “open to debate”. sorry if my brevity made me seem rude. cheers, jaymee

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Mar 16, 2008 at 2:41 pm

  Other meanings of “moot” here, including this one: “hypothetical case argued by law students as an exercise.” When talking about causes of autism, the discussion tends to turn quickly into “hypotheticals” and my focus remains those in front of me, here and now. thanks for your patience with me!

• renee
  Apr 23, 2008 at 2:27 pm

  Regarding the theory of autism and ultrasound, has this currently been dismissed by neuroscientists and ACOG? Does anyone know if there are any current studies being conducted with autism in mind? What about other fetal brain development associations?
  renee

• stopautismquackery
  Apr 23, 2008 at 2:39 pm

  Nothing has been dismissed as long as someone can get funding for it. That’s part of the problem, when it comes to autism nearly everyone has a theory.

• Kevin
  May 4, 2008 at 9:38 am

  The May/June 2008 issue of Science Illustrated had an interesting article about a theory a couple of scientist have concerning the nervous system. Their theory is that special sound waves which they’ve labeled solitons are the way the system functions, not electrically as is currently taught. when I read that article I couldn’t help but wonder if ultrasound might be the reason for the rise in autism, so I googled and wound up here. See, my reason for wondering is because no pregnant woman would allow a Taser to be applied to her belly for fear of damaging the baby, and the reason is because since the nervous system is supposedly electrical high voltage can’t be good. But if the brain uses sound to function, then couldn’t ultrasound be equally harmful to a developing fetus?

  Also, just because the doctors say ultrasound is harmless doesn’t mean that much to me, doctors once thought thalidomide was a good drug to give pregnant women and that drug resulted in babies being born with malformed limbs. Anyway, this issue of Science Illustrated was really good, the article is definitely worth a read, anyone who’s interested should drop by his local bookstore. Thanks for reading my post!

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  May 4, 2008 at 9:47 am

  @Kevin,
  thanks for noting the study i Science Illustrated—I’d also say that making a correlation between ultrasound use and the “autism epidemic” is assuming too much. Very best—

• The Puzzling Spectrum of Autism Causes
  May 5, 2008 at 3:11 pm

  […] do TV, ultrasounds, insufficient vitamin D, air pollution, a mother having the flu while pregnant, mercury, have to do […]

• This and Last Weeks Top Posts: Life on the Road with Charlie Means You Have to Pay Attention
  May 18, 2008 at 4:42 am

  […] Puzzling Spectrum of Autism Causes What do TV, ultrasounds, insufficient vitamin D, air pollution, a mother having the flu while pregnant, mercury, have to do […]

• sheri
  May 22, 2008 at 8:45 pm

  please take heed to assemblyman Joe’s advice….
  I do ultrasounds and am QUITE CONCERNED about what the companies that make ultrasound machines are doing. Ultrasound produces heat cellularlly, which may not produce effects at every juncture during gestation, but in early development may impede the development of forming brain cells in utero! We have as a profession tried to make every patient (mother) happy and forgotten the important “other” patient
  which is usually the fetus.

Have an opinion? Leave a comment:

• Use this area to discover new blogs and content in the b5media network.
• Beauty & Style
• Business
• Celebrities
• Entertainment
• Health & Wellness
• Lifestyles
• Music
• Sports
• Team Blogs
• Technology
• Travel & Culture
• Video Games