By the mid-eighties over 100 million people around the world had experienced ultrasound scans before they were born. Today, practically every pregnant woman in Europe and in North America could have a minumum of one ultrasound scan during her pregnancy. Most expectant women receive their first referral for a check during their first ante-natal appointment; only some of them question whether it is necessary and even fewer know of its potential harm. Most women's magazines, newspapers, and pregnancy books tend to recommend ultrasound scans to guarantee the safety and healthy development of the fetus, even though that no study proves that having an ultrasound scan provides more benefits than devoid of one. In an official statement, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) admitted that no well-controlled study has yet proven that routine scanning of prenatal patients will improve the results of pregnancy.<br/><br/>On another hand, researchers in New York studied 15,000 pregnant women who received ultrasound scans. They concluded that scanning provided no benefits whatsoever in any of the risk categories such as for instance premature babies, fetal death, multiple births, late-term-pregnancies, etc. In reality, as much as this date, ultrasound scans haven't revealed any information that is of clinical value. On the contrary, there's more evidence today than previously that scans can be harmful for the mother and the unborn child. The Association for Improvements in the Maternity Services (AIMS), England, recorded cases of women who aborted their perfectly fit and healthy babies as a result of misinterpreted scans. It's nearly impossible to estimate just how many women went through similar ordeals because most cases are not reported.<br/><br/>In 1990 researchers in Finland conducted a big trial study with ultrasound. The ultrasound scans diagnosed 250 women with placenta previa in early pregnancy, a condition where in fact the placenta lies low and therefore may prevent the child from being born vaginally. The mothers were informed that they should expect a Caesarean section. Nevertheless when it came to giving birth, only 4 women still had placenta previa.In virtually all cases, the placenta moved out of the way when the womb started to grow. Ironically, the control group, which received no ultrasound scanning also had 4 women with placenta previa; these delivered their babies safely.<br/><br/>Even though that respected medical journals like the Lancet, The Canadian Medical Association Journal, and the New England Journal of Medicine have all written about the hazardous aftereffects of ultrasound use, mainstream medicine has all but ignored the negative evidence. Even the FDA has commented on the dangers 3d ultrasound of ultrasound. Based on a tale by the Associated Press, their position on the technique is this: "Ultrasound is a questionnaire of energy, and even at low levels, laboratory studies show that it can produce physical effects in tissue, such as for instance jarring vibrations and a rise in temperature... prenatal ultrasounds can't be considered innocuous."<br/><br/>Millions of women around the globe, without having to be conscious of the potential side effects of ultrasounds, are participating in the greatest medical experiment of times. Their babies will be the guinea pigs in this experiment. They become at risk of external and internal harmful influences when their delicate electromagnetic fields are distorted, misaligned or damaged by highly concentrated doses of ultrasound; exposure compared to that is neither natural nor ideal for any human being. We cannot solely count on machines for diagnostic purposes simply because machines are thought less inclined to make mistakes than doctors. All findings have to be interpreted properly before they can serve as helpful tips for treatment. As demonstrated in the above mentioned study, 98.4 percent of the original complications through the women's pregnancy cleared independently mainly because the human body knows how to deal with such problems perfectly well without intervention. Machines don't know that the readings they produce may actually prove to be always a wrong diagnosis.