I don't know if this is the right spot for this, so please move if necessary.
I've been researching on the internet and found a number of sources suggesting there's a link between increased use in ultrasound & cord clamping and the increase in autism/ASD.
I'm not sure I'd feel confident going through a pg without any scans, given my age and a previous mc, even though I know women have gone through centuries without them. I know research shows that statistically there's no increase in baby health from using ultrasound, but the more I've read about possible complications, the less I feel we could go without. How else can you find out about placenta praevia, vasa praevia etc?
The link between cord clamping and oxygen deprevation in bub seems clear, so hopefully that won't be too big a fight, but I'm really not sure about the no ultrsound thing. I'm happy to keep them to a minimum, but then how many is too many and does it depend on how strong the machine is?
Has anyone found similar research/ had any experience with this?
Supposed Link between ultrasound, cord clamping & asd/autism.
Hi Tashybabe,
I posted an article a few months ago on the risks of ultrasound technology. I will try to find it for you. There are many medical professionals who advise against unecessary scans because of emerging evidence for ultrasound technology which is not favourable, and also because it is still a very new form of technology and the full effects will not be known for some years - until further study is done.
Of course it is a useful form of technology for high risk pregnancies, however.
It is for this reason (and my desire for minimal intervention) that I have chosen not to have any scans. You will find quite a few women in the natural parenting forums who also choose not to scan their babies. We are a growing phenomenon!! In other countries ultrasound for the unborn is not common practice (for various reasons). Research still indicates that a woman's LMP (last menstrual period) and cycle length is a more accurate indication of estimated due date than ultrasound technology - which has some medical professionals questioning the need for early dating scans at all, and the impact they may have on artificial induction rates (for simply being 'overdue') and hence ceasarean section because of inaccurate estimation of due dates.
As for cord clamping, I know a lot of women choose to delay cord clamping after the birth until the cord has stopped pulsating, as a large volume of blood and white blood cells are passed onto the baby in this period - which increases their immunity and the amount of oxygen in their body, and decreases their risk of developing certain conditions (ie - vitamin K deficiency).
'Lotus birth' is also becoming more popular now and is common practice in many traditional cultures- whereby the woman delays cutting the cord until the placenta has been naturally delivered - potentially a couple of hours after the birth. In traditional cultures this practice holds a special spiritual significance for the mother and baby to be attached in this way, and the cutting of the cord signifies a 'letting go' with ceremonious applause.
I have not read of a link between ultrasound and early cord clamping with ADS and autism - although that sounds quite plausible to me given some of the things I have read. I suppose that is an area for further research!!!
its pretty controversial - and I don't wish to alarm anyone. But I think it is a mothers right (or a human right, rather!) to be fully informed in order to truly consent to all these supposedly 'necessary' interventions. Information is power!!
I have a daughter with ASD and we had 3 scans on her whilst pregnant, one was during a m/c scare, another was the 20 week one and the last was at 30 weeks whilst at work when the probe was on us for 2 minutes tops.
I don't know about the relativeness of ASD and u/s... or cord clamping for that... I DO know that there is a strong link in genetics towards ASD. It runs in families. Its not a death warrant. Its hard work, but its not the end of the world, its just the beginning of a new one
Christy - I've read some of your posts and can see you are doing an amazing job. I realise it's not a death sentence, but it is something that really worries me. I'm not sure how I'd cope. Also, I suspect there is a genetic tendency in my family (I'm convinced my Dad is Aspergers or something, and I have ADD - my GP informs me there's some kind of relationship bw ASD and ADD)
Jellybean - thanks for the article. I've read similar things. I'm not sure I can go with NO ultrsounds at all. What I'm weighing up is the risks vs benefits. Having had a 1st trimester mc, I've decided that there's no point in me having an ultrasound again in the 1st trimester. A mc can't be stopped at that early age and to be honest, seeing the heartbeat at week 6 was amazing and emotional, but not necessary. Not seeing a heartbeat 4 weeks later undid all that joy. I'd rather just close my eyes and hope for the best and trust in my body next time that it's telling me what's going on symptom wise. I certainly don't see the point of a dating scan. As far as I'm concerned, there's a reason due dates are estimated.
A continued argument from that would be that there's no logical reason for an u/s before viability. If something's going to go wrong up to then, again not much can be done. On the other hand, I've seen cases where there's threatened mc in the 2nd trimester where bed rest has improved the chances of a successful pg. I assume in those cases an ultrasound would hopefully pick up if that's a viable treatment (ie by ascertaining level of amniotic fluid etc). I guess in that situation it's a play it by ear scenario.
Assuming low risk, my biggest question would be whether to bother with the NT scan. I don't know how much data is gained from the triple test alone (I see I need to do more reading). Talking to my OB/Gyn I've said unless you can give me 100% that there's someting wrong, what's the point? So it's a decision of - do we get a screening scan at week 12, exposing a developing bub to high soundwaves, go straight to an amnio and increase the risk of mc (as well as exposing bub to high sound waves), skip it all together and take the risk of deformity/chromosone problem.... I really don't know. I do know we'd abort if we 100% knew there was a major problem.
I also realise that things like placenta praevia and vasa praevia can be diagnosed in late pregnancy and I'd rather know that than risk bleeding to death. Same regarding the argument for u/s for diagnosing potential risks like heart problems, which would require a paediatrist team standing by at birth.
I feel that re: ultrasound, you're damned if you do & damned if you don't. I'll probably end up with 1 or 2, but don't want many.
re: cord clamping, the argument is a lot easier. Regardless of whether there's a link to autism or not, I see no logical reason to clamp the cord early so will definately insist on cord clamping.
I have only ever opted for the one ultrasound - the 19 week morphology scan. For me, I never saw the point in having an earlier scan, and I chose not to take up the option of the NT scan either. You don't get enough info from it, only a probability, and the only way to know for sure whether your baby has Downs Syndrome is to have amnio or CVS which I would not agree to anyway. So it was essentially pointless for me. So basically the reason I only had one scan is because it seemed unnecessary for me to have any more. If I was told that there is a good reason for another one - like suspected placenta praevia, or suspected breech presentation - then I would agree to it. But I am not a big believer in having ultrasounds just to see the baby, or to simply find out the sex. I have bonded just fine with all my babies in the womb without needing to see them.
Ultrasound, cord clamping & autism
Reply With Quote
Supposed Link between ultrasound, cord clamping & asd/autism.
Bookmarks