Tags: ultrasound | risk | baby | keepsake

Do Ultrasounds Hurt Babies?

By    |   Thursday, 18 December 2014 09:43 AM EST

For many expectant couples, the most thrilling moment of pregnancy is seeing the first ultrasound images of their unborn baby. Such images are proof that the “something” they’ve created is actually someone.
 
Many obstetric doctors are equipping their offices with 3D and 4D ultrasound machines that cost upward of $100,000. Such machines allow prospective parents to take home detailed pictures of their baby and endearing videos of the baby yawning, winking, kicking, thumb sucking or rubbing his or her nose.
 
Lawrence Platt, M.D., director of the Center for Fetal Medicine & Women’s Ultrasound in Los Angeles, is happy to provide patients with high-definition pictures and videos of their pre-borns.
 
What’s not OK, according to Dr. Platt and many other ob-gyns, are commercial “keepsake” ultrasound centers that exist primarily for entertainment rather than for medical reasons. He worries that keepsake ultrasound centers may be staffed by untrained technicians who unwittingly expose patients to potentially harmful amounts of ultrasound energy.
 
Centers typically charge several hundred dollars to document a pregnancy starting as early as 14 weeks’ gestation. Some even offer theater seating so family and friends can watch ultrasound videos on big-screen TVs.
 
“Ultrasound should be done for clinical indications only,” Dr. Platt tells Newsmax Health.
 
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration agrees. In a consumer alert issued this week, the agency said expectant parents should leave prenatal picture-taking to medical professionals, noting the use of ultrasound imaging and heartbeat monitors for "keepsake" images and videos is not entirely risk-free.
 
"Although there is a lack of evidence of any harm due to ultrasound imaging and heartbeat monitors, prudent use of these devices by trained health care providers is important," Shahram Vaezy, an FDA biomedical engineer, said in an agency news release.
 
"Ultrasound can heat tissues slightly, and in some cases, it can also produce very small bubbles [cavitation] in some tissues."
 
Because the long-term effects of tissue heating and cavitation are unknown, ultrasound scans should be done only when there is a medical need and only by professionally trained operators, the FDA said.
 
Dr. Platt is a past president of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, one of several major organizations that have come out strongly against keepsake ultrasounds. Other opponents include the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
 
“There’s no question that what we see [in keepsake centers] does sometimes translate into misuse,” says Dr. Platt.
 
So far, no studies have proven beyond doubt that ultrasound – a technology that uses sound waves instead of radiation – is harmful to babies. But it’s important to remember that all of the human epidemiological studies which demonstrated ultrasound’s safety were conducted before 1992. Since then, the allowable limit on ultrasound exposure has increased sevenfold!
 
Obviously, only new epidemiological studies can demonstrate whether or not today’s higher intensity limit is safe or unsafe.
 
Meanwhile, smaller studies suggest that it may be advisable to avoid any prenatal ultrasound scans unless there is compelling evidence to show that they are medically necessary.
 
For example, a Yale University study of pregnant mice showed that ultrasound exposure – at levels equivalent to those used in humans – interfered with normal brain development in the pups. This finding suggests that ultrasound exposure in humans could potentially lead to brain abnormalities. Other animal studies associate ultrasound exposure with brain hemorrhages.
 
A U.K. study of humans showed that the risk of perinatal death was twofold higher in unborn babies exposed to two or more Doppler ultrasounds.
 
What are prospective parents to do?
 
“Err on the side of caution,” advises Dr. Platt.
 
Unless there are compelling medical reasons to have an ultrasound, it’s best to avoid them. (Finding out a baby’s sex is not considered a compelling reason.)
 
If an ultrasound is deemed medically necessary, limit total exposure time and intensity. It’s especially important to avoid Doppler ultrasound during the first trimester.
 
Above all, avoid the temptation to document a pregnancy with “keepsake” ultrasounds. Why take a chance on your baby’s health for the sake of a video?
 
The full version of this article appeared in Health Radar newsletter. To read more, click here.

© 2026 NewsmaxHealth. All rights reserved.


Health-News
Many expectant couples are opting for 'keepsake' ultrasound images of their unborn babies. But some health experts worry that commercial ultrasound centers are offering services primarily for entertainment rather than for medical reasons, which might be risky.
ultrasound, risk, baby, keepsake
693
2014-43-18
Thursday, 18 December 2014 09:43 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Sign up for Newsmax’s Daily Newsletter

Receive breaking news and original analysis - sent right to your inbox.

(Optional for Local News)
Privacy: We never share your email address.
Join the Newsmax Community
Read and Post Comments
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
 
Find Your Condition
Get Newsmax Text Alerts
TOP

The information presented on this website is not intended as specific medical advice and is not a substitute for professional medical treatment or diagnosis. Read Newsmax Terms and Conditions of Service.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
NEWSMAX.COM
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved