Wise Up Journal
By Gabriel O’Hara

As ultrasounds are standard practice among the majority of society the information you are about to read might be of importance to you. This article contains but a handful of scientific studies from many that show the known dangers of ultrasounds preformed on the developing baby. Of course an ultrasounds will not kill a baby, otherwise it would have already been banned, however studies show ultrasounds do lower a human’s IQ by a significant amount. You will read how these facts are known at the top by medical research professionals and by Government health and safety authorities but not necessarily by low level ultrasound practitioners employed by hospitals and clinics. The public take for granted that they are safe because they are in use. At the end you can use your own intellect to decide if ultrasounds are worth the risk to babies.

The main stream magazine New Scientist on June 12th 1999 (issue 2190) reported the following: “ULTRASOUND scans can stop cells from dividing and make them commit suicide.
“routine scans, which have let doctors peek at fetuses and internal organs for the past 40 years, affect the normal cell cycle. A team led by Patrick Brennan of University College Dublin gave 12 mice an 8-megahertz scan lasting for 15 minutes. Hospital scans, which reflect inaudible sound waves off soft tissue to produce images on a monitor, use frequencies of between 3 and 10 megahertz”

The scientific study below comes from a government website (.gov) source, the PMC (PubMed Central) which is an online archive of the biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health. The study involved children aged between 2 years and 8 years old. The results showed that children exposed to ultrasounds in the womb are twice as likely to suffer from delayed speech as those not exposed.


“[Canadian Medical Association Journal] 1993 November 15

“Case-control study of prenatal ultrasonography exposure in children with delayed speech.

“J D Campbell, R W Elford, and R F Brant
Department of Surgery, University of Calgary, Alta.

“OBJECTIVE: To determine whether there is an association between prenatal ultrasound exposure and delayed speech in children. DESIGN: Case-control study. SETTING: Network of community physicians affiliated with the Primary Care Research Unit, University of Calgary. SUBJECTS: Thirty-four practitioners identified 72 children aged 24 to 100 months who had undergone a formal speech-language evaluation and were found to have delayed speech of unknown cause by a speech-language pathologist. For each case subject the practitioners found two control subjects matched for sex, date of birth, sibling birth order and associated health problems. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of prenatal ultrasound exposure and delayed speech. RESULTS: The children with delayed speech had a higher rate of ultrasound exposure than the control subjects. The findings suggest that a child with delayed speech is about twice as likely as a child without delayed speech to have been exposed to prenatal ultrasound waves (odds ratio 2.8, 95% confidence limit 1.5 to 5.3; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: An association between prenatal ultrasonography exposure and delayed speech was found. If there is no obvious clinical indication for diagnostic in-utero ultrasonography, physicians might be wise to caution their patients about the vulnerability of the fetus to noxious agents.”

The scientific research below comes from a government website database, the National Center for Biotechnology Information, that shows low powered ultrasounds can alter behaviour and impair brain function. This is because standard heat from ultrasounds intensifies within the spherical skull.


“[Indian journal of experimental biology] 1996 Sep

“Changes in mouse behavior induced by fetal exposure to diagnostic ultrasound.“Department of Anatomy, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, India.

“Pregnant Swiss albino mice were exposed to diagnostic ultrasound (3.5 MHz, 65mw, ISPTP = 1 W/cm2, ISATA = 240 W/cm2) for 10 min on day 14, 16 or 17 of gestation to assess any changes in physiological reflexes (pinna detachment, eye opening and fur development) and postnatal mortality. Changes in locomotor activity by open field test and dark/bright arena test and learning and memory by hole board test were also recorded. No change was observed in physiological reflexes and postnatal mortality. However there were significant alterations in behavior in all the three exposed groups. These results demonstrate that ultrasound exposure during the late fetal period can impair brain function in adult mouse.

The following passage from Mid Wifery Today points out the fact that today in our brave new world people take safety for granted at their own risk. Just because something is in widespread use and authority figures say something is safe does not mean in reality it is safe. Mid Wifery Today: “Once again it is interesting to look at what happened with the issue of safety of X-rays during pregnancy. X-rays were used on pregnant women for almost fifty years and assumed to be safe. In 1937, a standard textbook on antenatal care stated: ‘It has been frequently asked whether there is any danger to the life of the child by the passage of X- rays through it; it can be said at once there is none if the examination is carried out by a competent radiologist or radiographer.’ A later edition of the same textbook stated: ‘It is now known that the unrestricted use of X-rays through the fetus caused childhood cancer.’”

A small percentage of women have complications during pregnancy such as ectopic pregnancies, IUGR and others but detection of these can be found by physical examination and blood tests. If ultrasounds are limited to this small percentage of women, whom undergo other detection methods first, then the majority of society would be protected. Routine ultrasounds should be avoided at all costs. Is it worth knowing the sex of the baby before it’s born causing it to have a lower IQ than he/she potentially could have had? Instead of the child being easily able to learn multiply languages he/she might struggle with two or even one. But then with education standards continuously dropping, the lower IQ child less effected can be expected in state education to get what is perceived as “top grades” and graduate from college knowing one subject in more detail, what we call specialized.

While people have the illusion of safety the perpetrators legally cover themselves so they can not be sued for billions like what happened to the cigarette industry whom testified and show biased skewed reports that smoking was not linked to cancer. Most people have been led to think that if it is in widespread use it must be safe, that view might help quickly ease the mind but it will not help the public‘s wellbeing or wallet in the long run. While people unknowingly suffering in delusion the authorities legally cover them selves. The U.S. authority (the FDA) put in place to give you a false sense of security you has this line on their website to protect themselves: “While ultrasound has been around for many years, expectant women and their families need to know that the long-term effects of repeated ultrasound exposures on the fetus are not fully known.” Do you know of anyone whom was given a weaver to sign by a doctor before having ultrasounds bounce off of their babies in the womb? The general public can be expected not to come across that FDA line as State education has never thought it’s taxpayers to question authority and to research what authority claims. You can view that FDA line here: http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2004/104_images.html

The article below from The Times shows that the medical money industry are considering marketing the heat from ultrasound as a male contraceptive.

The Times

“Sperm warfare
“From from radio-controlled valves to ultrasound, male contraception is going high-tech

“Ultrasound scrambles sperm
“Zapping the testes with ultrasound is another promising new male contraceptive. It is simple and convenient: a machine applies ultrasound waves to heat the testes painlessly for ten minutes, scrambling sperm-making for six months. Fertility returns gradually, although it is not clear yet how many times men can safely use the method without permanently affecting their sperm count.”

It seems that nowadays there are many man-made fertility and IQ pitfalls but nothing in majority use giving a boost to them. The Canadian state broadcaster Canadian Broadcasting Corporation reported: “The average sperm count of a North American college student today is less than half of what it was 50 years ago. The quality of sperm is declining. Eighty-five per cent of the sperm produced by a healthy male is DNA-damaged.”

One of the main contributors, but not the only contributor, to this major crisis is the mad-made chemical BPA used in plastics. BPA was discovered in the 1930‘s and “that it could be used as a synthetic estrogen”. The critical last stages of the western male becoming infertile is a larger problem than decreasing tiger numbers in the wild but we seem to hear more about the tigers on corporate TV don’t we? Informed citizens whom didn’t consider too many people on the planet a problem like most political ideologies forced the Canadian government to ban such plastic baby bottles in 2008 as the Daily Mail reports, “baby bottles containing a controversial ‘gender bending’ chemical are to be barred in Canada, the first country to introduce such a ban.” Have the politicians employed by your government given you the same warning? Maybe it’s time to start thinking for your self.

In the past humans, and animal species today, were very careful not to expose themselves and their young to elements which effects were unknown to them. However, today the masses of people expose their children to injections, altered food stuffs and other things without even attempting to read what is in them let alone to borrow a book from a library or do research on the internet what the individual man-made ingredients actually do. Today with exploding cancer rates and dropping IQ rates the blind trust still remains and the survival instinct has not come back yet.

Elitist Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell (1872-1970), a Nobel Prize winner, worked on the education of young children and was an award winner of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. A highly respected man by the excessively rich dominant minority. Russell who believed in reducing the fertility and IQ rate of the general public to ease “overpopulation” and produce more docile workers recommended the following in his book The Scientific Outlook (1931), “by means of injections and drugs and chemicals the population could be induced to bear whatever its scientific masters may decide to be for its good.” You can purchase this highly respected Nobel Prize winner’s book (IBN 041524997X) from mainstream stores or request a copy at your local library.