My wife wanted natural delivery for all out children, but our first daughter was breech. The obstetrician, woman, favored natural deliveries, not c-sections, and saw no need for ultrasounds. My wife said she just didn't feel right, something was wrong, and an ultrasound was done and indicated a footling breech position, the most dangerous for both baby and momma. My wife tried natural several techniques suggested by the obstetrician to have the baby move to a normal or at least buttucks first breech position, a bit safer. Nothing worked. She was recommended to see an obstetrician who was supposedly skilled in manual reversions. I cringed and left the room while the procedure was done. The doctor was convinced he was successful. An ultrasound still showed a footling breech. The original obstetrician said she had successfully delivered breech birthings of all positions, so when my wife went into labor she hoped for a natural delivery as did the doctor, but was prepared for a C-section because of what the ultrasounds revealed. I was in the room when my wifes labor was painful and long, then required an emergency C-section with my wife insisting I stay in the room. Our first born was birthed via C-section and when I saw her, she looked like an angel. Now 36 years later my oldest daughter has given birth to three healthy babies, the first a C-section in the hospital; the next two natural with a mid-wife in her bedroom. My wife went on to have 4 more children, all natural vaginal births. But I recall how helpful we found the ultrasounds for our first child and for my wife. Without them my wife's plan was to give birth in our home, which given the breech position could have ended the life of both my wife and my first daughter.
"My wife said she just didn't feel right, something was wrong, and an ultrasound was done..." yes, yes, a thousand times yes. Your wife knew something wasn't right, the doctor listened to her, and THEN did the testing to help figure out and solve the problem. Prenatal ultrasound is **life-saving** when used appropriately. It should absolutely be used when needed, just like cesarean birth. It's the routine use of ultrasound that is not evidence-based in the absence of palpitating a woman's abdomen and other clinical markers that there may be a problem... Does this make sense, Steve?
Yes, it makes sense. Much depends on the doctors you see and also what is considered acceptable medical practice in the state. After our first daughter's birth my wife decided to have future births in hospital. But she didn't want an episiotomy or pain killers. I wanted what was best for her, but difficult to watch someboy you love in pain. Her first V-Bac, my son, was only 13 months after the C-section with my oldest daughter. My wife wanted to give birth squatting, not lying down. This went against the hospital's policy and we were constrained by insurance as to which hospital we had coverage. Her labor went quickly and I was in the room. I wanted to call the nurse and doctor but my wife said no. She got on the floor, squatted, and pushed. I grabbed the bedding off the bed, plus the pillow, and put them underneath so the baby wouldn't hit the floor head first. As my son's head crowned, dark hair, the nurse came running in and called the doctor. The nurse pushed me aside and took over, completing the birth whilst my wife squatted! The doctor arrived and allowed me to cut the umbilical cord.
Pain isn't inevitable in all births. I think pain is largely a sign of abnormality. I had four births without pain, and only a hour of pain with the final one, because I was exhausted and had labored for over 30 hours. We are taught to expect pain. If we were taught to expect pressure instead, and were not forced to lie on the back, many more women would not experience pain. Lying on the back puts the baby's weight on the arteries that feed the uterus. It is lack of blood flow that causes the pain. Also, a woman should not push, but let the uterus do the work. This will prevent many tears, so no episiotomy would be necessary. As for teaching to expect pain, Lamaze is guilty of this.
Thank you. I wish I had this advice. Way back when. And it is sad how much “old wives tales“ were so much wiser than we are today. We have a family member who nearly aborted, because the doctors assured her that her child was going to be born with multiple birth defects. Luckily, they didn’t listen. The child came out perfect!
That's a chilling story--with a happy ending. So glad she didn't choose abortion. But if she had, she would not have known the baby was perfect. When I went to research birth in Iceland, I was told by the doctors and the midwives that they autopsy every aborted baby so they can have hard data about the accuracy of the testing. We don't do that in America. But we should.
THANK YOU for saying this! It needs to be said, and said again. And thank you for mentioning the toxicity of the gel. I looked into this when I had treatments. Because of the toxicity, I used coconut oil instead. But if you want the doctor to use it instead of gel for imaging, he will refuse. Why? It is said to work. And by the way, we shouldn't be using ultrasound if a mother plans to abort if the baby has an anomaly. Why? Because ultrasound can be dead wrong. If the baby is normal, she just got rid of a normal child she wanted. If the baby has an anomaly that doesn't show up, the mother just might sue the doctor! And in any case, it is simply wrong to kill a baby for not being perfect. None of us is perfect. And it devalues those of us with more obvious medical problems. It is the precursor to atrocities of other kinds. If the mother cannot handle a baby with that particular problem, she can choose adoption. She may say it will hurt more to do that than have an abortion, but studies show the opposite is true. I even talked to a woman for some time who had had an abortion because her baby had hydrocephalus. She was an emotional MESS! She told me, 'If I could just have looked into his eyes." And this was at a time when they were doing prenatal surgery for this condition, and we know it is caused by deficiencies in certain B vitamins. Totally ludicrous. My nephew has Down Syndrome. My sister refused a test because she would never consent to an abortion. He is a precious human being, a valued member of the family, deeply loved. And a truly amazing human being. In fact, he has unbelievable skills in language. His language development was even earlier than that of a child who is considered a genius at languages, and later on, I was able to teach him foreign languages very quickly. If we would stop trying to force them into our broken educational system and teach them the way they learn, he could have made a career as an interpreter. His talent has been wasted by our attitudes.
Often people don't realize that the information that doctors are wanting them to have does not serve any purpose except stress unless abortion is on the table. I'm surprised how many doctors push hard for prenatal infanticide. This study in the Journal of Medical Ethics makes many people upset, but it is very interesting and telling and makes an important point ... https://jme.bmj.com/content/39/5/261
By the way. You spoke of the toxicity of the gels. My research revealed that it was the BLUE COLOR that was highly toxic, the rest of it not nearly as much. And the color is totally unnecessary for their purposes.
I do not understand why doctors are tolerating abortionists. Establishment medicine is responsible for the existence of widespread abortion. If they upheld medical ethics and expelled these people from the profession, there would be few left to do abortions. Doctors don't warn people. I once warned a woman against amniocentesis. I said it could cause the baby to develop spinal meningitis. She was planning an abortion if the baby was "found" to be abnormal. The baby was normal. And later developed spinal meningitis. I hate being a prophet for stuff like that! If doctors had stood up against abortionists in the first place, it is highly unlikely there would ever have been any Covid, let alone death shots, and certainly no mandates. Thank you for the link.
Hi, Jennifer, here to brag , neither of our daughters were ultrasounded during my wife’s pregnancy 41 & 44 years ago: after birth they did unfortunately get their share of Tylenol I am sad to say, but I didn’t know any better then (and likely no one else did).
Thanks for linking the Tylenol articles.
I found that a good menstrual history (cycle length, mittleschmertz, regularity, etc. & serial clinical exams (and knowing the fruit scale of uterine size for bimanual exams 8 wk lemon or tennis ball, 10 weeks large orange, 12 weeks grapefruit)helps a lot in prenatal care); still, I confess I was probably too liberal with ordering ultrasounds on my patients, though less so than my OB colleagues.
Unfortunately… the narrative has been pushed and pushed for ultrasounds . 3 D ultrasounds are now done as a side hustle by radiology companies and obstetrical offices to make CASH 💰. Yep never have to report a dime ! ACOG has made ultrasounds standard of care for dating the gestation , Anatomy scans and growth . Patients can refuse anytime! I hope they do . Remember there are malpractice attorneys out there when there is a fetal anomaly that was not found and you have a wrongful life case on your hands …. Or a malpositioned birth that needs a stat c-section or fetal distress that’s not acted up quickly enough . Lot to unpack here , thank you . Btw the jab has been the worse thing that was recommended by the ACOG . The side effects have been horrific. Ultrasounds have picked up growth disorders, abruption sand many side effects from the jab .
Thank you for this! My goal is to have a vbac and I would love a homebirth but the state doesn’t allow it because you know, doctors know better than midwives because they are also surgeons (sarcasm). But it means I have to give birth in a hospital and I’m nervous to request no ultrasounds since if they don’t accept me as a patient bc of that (can they reject you for no ultrasounds? I feel like they’d demand it bc of my C-section?), then we may have to go out of state, which is a lot financially and when we have a very energetic toddler
Have you read this article, Dani? It's my all-time favorite piece about VBAC. It was written years ago but I think it will inspire you: http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/12/16/ep.vbac.birth.at.home/index.html. Also the book SIMPLY GIVE BIRTH has many wonderful VBAC stories in it. Finally, this is a fabulous book about VBAC as well (if you like to read): https://jennifermargulis.net/you-can-have-a-vbac2c/ Roanna, who wrote that last book, said she had ultrasounds and made the tech do them with lightening speed so her baby was scanned for the least amount of time possible. She was, um, quite forceful and scared the technician, I think...
I assembled a class and we studied midwifery under a midwife who attended British royalty. One of the students has a sister who had a Caesarean, and she wanted a homebirth. We taught her the massage technique for the scar we learned from the midwife. She went into labor but couldn't give birth because her tailbone was fused and wouldn't move out of the way. The doctor who performed the second Caesarean said the scar from the previous one would never have ruptured in a million years.
Ruptures, I think you mean. I have not seen one thank God. There are ruptures and there are ruptures; if a vertical scar ruptures it truly can be catastrophic; low segment transverse scars are less likely to be, which is why VBACs are an option in those situations.
If you meant abruption, then yes, truly they can be catastrophic.
I opted not to have any ultrasounds with most of my pregnancies... Or so I thought at the time. I didn't realize doppler was also ultrasound. Earlier this month I gave birth at home to my first baby who had had no doppler or ultrasound, except for some doppler during labor to more easily check on baby's well being.
I have heard about this before. It makes one wonder if anything the medical community does is really safe. How were billions of humans ever born before all this modern technology? They want us to believe that we could never survive on our own without all this medical tyranny.
I'm generally sympathetic to your point. But it's also true that mortality rates for both mother and child were significantly higher before modern practices. I had five children, the first and last born via C-sections, with 3 VBACs in between.
Due to an undetected uterine anomaly, our first baby would have unavoidably died in utero at 37.5 weeks were it not for the bio-physical profile conducted via ultrasound when she went into distress, and the subsequent emergency C-section that ensued. Also, had those life-saving interventions not existed, I too would have died due to my uterine anomaly, attempting to birth the stillborn baby that would have resulted. So, counting me and my five children, that's 6 humans who exist today because of that technology.
So while I do lean heavily holistic when it comes to health and medicine, but there are ways in which modern medicine has provided miracles in the arena of obstetrics.
EDITED to add: Speaking of childbirth mortality rates, our oldest, a daughter, would herself have died at 34 weeks pregnant with her first, due to HELLP syndrome, were it not for the modern diagnostic, therapeutic, and surgical advances that saved not only her life (again), but also her preterm baby's, who would have died with her. She has since had a second delivery of a healthy child via VBAC. My sister and her second child, due to complications at birth, would also definitively have been mortality statistics were it not for emergency C-sections. So that's actually 10 people in my own family who exist today, who would not have in less modern times.
Pregnant women should run far away from any "medical" test involving any sort of waves, regardless of how "safe" they are assured such a test is. Now that we see all of the disability and death caused by the "safe & effective" Plandemic products, it should be quite clear that no one in any medical field should be automatically trusted to not put their wallet first.
I was denied access to medical care by UCLA and several other obstetricians because I refused an ultrasound. I was 18 weeks pregnant before I found a doctor who would take me as a patient and not insist on the ultrasound. I assured him there was nothing wrong with the pregnancy, I could feel it was fine, I had lost other pregnancies and I saw the losses in dreams prior to the miscarriages, and I had also felt 'off' during those pregnancies. In one dream, I was in a car with little girls who had tumours all over their bodies, one came to me, kissed me on the lips, I still remember the sensation and said to me 'goodbye', I miscarried the following morning. When I was in the UCLA clinic's waiting room, I saw a large fish tank, with a notice not to disturb the fish by touching the glass of the tank. Yet, they insisted I disturb the fetus through the use of penetrating heat waves from ultrasound technology, which can damage the brain. I walked out of the clinic determined to go without medical care if I couldn't find a doctor who would honour my wishes. I continued the same fight to protect my healthy child from the propaganda assaults to inject babies with vaccines that contain all manner of harmful ingredients, depriving the development of natural immunity for life against a host of infectious diseases. The whole medical system needs to change, when docs financially benefit from dangerous practices, they will continue them. Few are ethical.
Oh Rita. Your experience with all of this really touches my heart. Such a good point about the fish tank. It's so hard to stand firm. And so so necessary. I couldn't agree with you more that the system needs a massive overhaul. We need to put babies and moms first, not money.
Yes. Also, I was treated poorly and rudely by the medical system for going against the protocols they demand for our own bodies. During covid I had to go to the ER, not for a respiratory illness though. Both nurses guilted me for not having taken the shot, while they were present, an official from Cedars came in demanding to know why I did not take the shot. I was in shock at the tactics. I had to explain myself, by saying a family member was injured, which was true, to shut them up. Now that we know the various mechanisms by which those mRNA shots can cause cancer, prion disease, cardiac damage and death particularly in teen boys, what would those nurses say. If I had caved to the pressure, and developed an autoimmune condition, how would those coercive nurses help me now. Sorry, would not be enough. The medical paradigm is changing for the wealthy. My own functional doctor will no longer accept insurance, and is switching to a concierge practice, 4 visits annually for $15k plus all you can 'eat' urgent calls. I can't afford that on top of insurance. Our family cardiologist has done the same, so another $25K a year on top of insurance, it is a medical system for the wealthy now. The rest of us who depend on insurance will get 15 minutes, 10 of those maybe with a PA, and then a pill that won't cure. And, Pfizer is working toward eliminating the middleman the internist, by selling drugs through their own centers to the patient. How often does one go to a nutritionist when feeling unwell, not often, is it even covered by insurance, it should be, because that is where a reversal can begin.
Heya Marjory, you can find information about the vitamin K shot in our book, The Vaccine-Friendly Plan. There are at least 3 different brands on the market. We looked at the ingredients and at least one contains aluminum. A very good alternative (besides simply saying no, thank you) is oral vitamin K. We also discuss that in the book, and reference a few solid science studies. You should be able to get a copy from any local library. Full disclosure: We opted OUT of vitamin K and did not use oral drops for all 4 of our babies (only the first one was born in the hospital, the next 3 were all born at home).
Hi Jennifer, Thank you for sharing information about the vitamin K shot. I am looking forward to reading more about it in your book! It is reassuring to know that you chose to opt OUT of vitamin K for your three children born at home. I would be interested in knowing if there is any compelling reason to give the oral vitamin K when one is circumcising a baby. That is a whole other complicated topic. Thanks again.
Thank you so much, Jennifer, for the article and for referring me to the chapter in your book, Your Baby, Your Way. I greatly appreciate your responsiveness to my interest in learning more about the topic of circumcision.
Definitely an interesting perspective on such a routine, ubiquitous medical procedure used during pregnancy. I delivered two healthy babies after uncomplicated pregnancies, although both were ever-so-slightly preterm, and I underwent all of the recommended ultrasounds.
It is eye-opening, therefore, to learn that these procedures are potentially dangerous to mothers and their unborn babies. A bit alarming, actually. It truly calls into question the legitimacy of the need for many routine medical procedures, and while most doctors have their patients' best interests at heart, there are certainly always incentives influencing their medical advice and treatment.
That being said, this is a refreshing reminder to educate ourselves on our healthcare decisions, and those of our providers. It certainly doesn't entirely blacklist ultrasounds in my book, but it is important to weigh all the benefits and potential risks when making any medical decision, especially during pregnancy.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. It makes sense that the heat from sound waves as well as the waves themselves could cause harm to a rapidly developing fetal brain. Any intervention in pregnancy carries risk. Sometimes it is necessary, I prefer to err on the side of caution.
Woah there...I'm going to admit I didn't finish reading this...but I need to pull a flag here...you are making a claim that sonographers don't understand, but you link to an article with only 22 sonographers as part of the sample where only 22 participants were able to show understanding....going to hazard it was the sonographers.
I am a sonographer. We do understand, most of are registered and have degrees on the use of ultrasound. I also know other users (doctors, midwives, nurses )don't as much, so I wouldn't want an fetal ultrasound from just anyone (some are very knowledgeable and more and more included in didactics). There are very clear guidelines for scanning time length based on body part and mechanical index guidelines based on body part being imaged.
I wholeheartedly disagree with a ultrasound without a valid medical reason (ie-entertainment ultrasounds), however there recently has been a lot of fear mongering that has led to people not receiving appropriate medical care. So please be careful of the blanket term sonographer for all users of ultrasound as it is wholly incorrect.
I'm sorry this article triggered you so much, Jodi. But very grateful that you were willing to chime in and share your thoughts here. Dr. Casanova told me about several studies that showed that machines are often mis-calibrated and that sonographers are not aware of the concept of ALARA, that is, setting machines on “as low as reasonably achievable” for measurements. This is backed up by pregnant women's experiences, that the techs tend to linger, print out extra photos, etc. The truth is that it **is** fun to see the baby and it may well help with early bonding. So I think the techs take their time because the mamas often *want* them to and request it. Everyone leaves happy. But as Dr. Casanova has said, with great sadness in his voice, it's not just a pretty picture. His grandson with autism recently died. He is so bereft. It's just a hypothesis at this point (as all science is if we are doing real science) but if prenatal ultrasound is contributing to autism in some susceptible children, we need to take action. Also, your criticism of the article is totally fair -- both that the N in the study I quoted was quite small **and** that we should not be critiquing professionals in a blanket way. Thank you for pointing this out.
I appreciate your comment 'in some susceptible'. It's obvious not all sonos or vaccines cause autism. I have one really "interesting" daughter-in-law who's always been a 1000% against vaccines. I used to promote them. Totally ignorant to ingredients or that the list from when my son's got them quadrupled! My other daughter-in-law is a sonographer and wonderful. Her oldest son was a little different from get go, but thriving and expressive! Then he got his 6 month vaccines and everything changed. It was devastating. She had actually even inquired to doctor of the safety ofso many vaccines at once. As you probably hear every single day and experienced yourself...he did not react well and stated if you're worried we can spilt them up a couple weeks apart. Her and I EVERY DAY wish she'd said piss off and left. My grandson, as you can imagine, has had a rough go. However, his mother, has been diligent and advocates for him continually! I could not be prouder of her! I babysat him twice a week for a few years while she worked. He and I have a bond like no other! He's almost 9 now. He is definitely different in some ways, but he's ridiculously smart (almost annoyingly! lol), he's loving, and expressive! His life will never be easy. People are cruel. I stated I appreciated susceptible because I can see in other family members it may have been something genetic. My "interesting" daughter-in-law says most children with autism have the MFT something gene. Makes me think mutha effer every time I see it. 🤭🤷♀️ So I'm not a scientists... LOL I'm not positive about the Tylenol thing...unless something in it has changed alot...like vax's. 🥴🙄 But not that it causing Autism would shock or surprise me either. I honestly felt like it was a ploy to pull focus off of vaccines. My mother used to say...it's not the mistakes we make, but what we learn from them. Sometimes that would give me comfort. It didn't when it came to vaccines. Keep writing. Keep getting the word out. You have the gift of being gracious regardless. I don't have that quality. 😬😁 God gave me looks not the gift of patience or sugar coating! 🤣🤣🤣 jk...kinda...at least about the good looks part! Gramma's getting old. lol
I'm so sorry about your grandson's difficult go of things. He sounds like an amazing kid. Feels like that didn't need to happen. Thank you for reminding us all that we need to be nuanced and see the individual. That's what gets lost with blanket recommendations ("requirements") that come down from the Oh So High and Mighty Health Authorities. The only real authority on any given person's health is that person...
The problem is doctors are given vaccine information from the makers of the vaccines. Conflicts of interest result in corruption. Leaning into a super busy doctor for information on vaccines, that he did not learn in college is not productive. Unfortunately, since their education on harms is very limited, parents have to spend the time to dig deep on the science themselves. We should not have to do that, but since pharma is in control, we have to.
I agree except you can't tell me they don't see first hand vaccine damage CONSTANTLY! At some point they are just ignoring it and pushing them anyway. It doesn't take college nor research to just look around and use some common sense!
Pediatricians may not be able to afford to run their offices without the financial incentives from vaccinating kids, it can amount to about a million dollars a year. So, there is plenty of incentive for doctors to refuse to connect the dots. Humans are selfish. Children are sacrificed. Freedom isn't free, we as parents have to fight to change the system, complacency results in our canoe drifting toward the waterfall. It takes intense rowing against the flow to get to the safety of shore. Most people won't invest that kind of energy into it. However, the autism pandemic is a result of our oversight.
Jennifer, I do agree with you that rules around the usage of Ultrasound are far two lax. Guidelines are often ignored. And it’s very clear that many Ultrasound techs and even obstetricians don’t understand and practice correct parameters. I’ve seen far too numerous posts where babies heartbeats are being checked during the first trimester with spectrum Doppler, which is strictly against the stance of the AIUM. It just gets ignored. And unfortunately, a lot of sonographers are following the orders of the doctors because they don’t want to risk losing their jobs, and parents are just trusting that their doctor knows best.
I do think there is a middle grounds when it comes to Ultrasound and a lot more conversations need to happen. I don’t agree with not doing ANY routine Ultrasound, but I feel like people need to be more educated on what their doctors don’t actually know about proper Ultrasound use. Most obstetricians are merely trained on how to use the machine with zero or little knowledge on the possible bio-effects.
Regarding the gel: When I was an ultrasound school, I was simultaneously going through treatment for breast cancer and was becoming much more aware of endocrine disruptors, etc. And I was also very concerned about the ingredients in the ultrasound gel. I found no alternatives to use. I have heard some people will use aloe gel. However, because of the materials on the transducer (the Ultrasound probe) most offices will not accept substitutes for the gel because they are worried about any possible risk of the breakdown of the materials on the probe.
I would love to see somebody create an ultrasound gel that is actually safe and nontoxic, I’m just not sure there would be a big enough concern by the medical industry for it.
Very useful information. The same with vaccines, doctors receive little education on their potential for harm, and they are also financially incentivized to push them.
I wouldn't say triggered at all, disappointed would be more appropriate. I can't speak to the calibration aspect. I have worked at places where biomedical team perform quality assurance and repairs. I will even agree that there should be more oversite on machines need updated and replaced...we all know how cheap most hospitals are and how they hate replacing equipment...
I can say without a doubt just about no sonographer lingers and creating a bonding experience. That again sound like an entertainment establishment.
I am so grateful I didn't go onto OB based on the stories that have been shared with me. Additionally, most of us are so overworked, we are working on pain daily. 90% of sonographer are injured and scanning in pain by about 10 years if my
memory serves. Many are burnt out and overworked.
I am sorry this Dr's grandson passed, but I am going to stand for my profession here.
If anyone us concerned about the training their sonographer has recieved, there are credentialing bodies and you are welome to ask. My credentials are on my nametag like most.
Sonographer here too who is very anti-medical establishment and generally agrees with the author on most of her content, but I agree with this comment. I too think that ultrasounds are majorly overused and wish there was a way to shut down ultrasound boutiques, but I also don’t think it’s safe to promote not doing them at all. There would a lot of life threatening things missed. Imagine a child being born vaginally who had an organ outside its body, which would have been caught during an anatomy scan but the mother avoided ultrasound. It would be devastating. Even more so in a home birth setting.
Thanks for weighing in Jacquelyn. Here in America we had better birth outcomes before the widespread use of ultrasounds, for both babies and for mamas. Our numbers (infant and maternal mortality, as well as near-misses, etc.) have been going in the wrong direction for years. I explore this in much more detail in my book, Your Baby, Your Way. Please don't misunderstand me: you may be right about ultrasounds. Perhaps the reasons for the downward trends are more because of vaccines and overly aggressive medical management of labor or because women are not as healthy as they were in the 1960s and 1970s. I don't know. But I have interviewed several women who had or were offered very long-lasting ultrasounds at every single prenatal visit and were not informed of any downsides. I believe that women know when something is amiss. And doctors and midwives who pay attention will spot what the women might not. So a more evidence-based model would be that we don't do them routinely but that we do use them when they're actually necessary.
I'm curious how that discovery during an anatomy scan would make a difference in terms of the medical outcome for the baby? I get the idea that it would save the parents the trauma of discovery at birth. But would it change the clinical outcome for the baby?
As I write about in my book, Your Baby, Your Way (see page 31), one study of 15,151 pregnant women published in the New England Journal of Medicine compared pregnant women who received 2 scans to pregnant women who received scans ONLY when some other medical indication suggested it was necessary. The results showed NO difference in fetal outcomes... The same team found, however, that routine ultrasounds led to much more expensive prenatal care, to the tune of $1 billion a year...
I think we have to take each situation on a case-by-case basis. Routinely doing any medical procedure has drawbacks. For decades docs didn't know that routine antibiotic prescriptions harmed the microbiome which is a major regulator in the body, and some microbiota were destroyed permanently. I don't say, never vax, never do an ultrasound, never take a steroid, these interventions have risks, but the less we need them, the better it seems to me anyway.
An interesting read until “the disturbing rise of autism” was flung around. The “rise” of autism has far more to do with people actually having an understanding of diagnostic criteria and people actually diagnosing women and POC. Not just little white boys and their parents that feel autism “stole” their child.
Not eugenic ableist fear mongering fuel. Insanely insensitive.
I’m very well aware of the study. It’s lobbed around often. Medicine in an intensely racist and ableist field and that study proves just that. Autism is not something anyone needs to fear in a child it is a difference not a deficit. We have absolutely 0 evidence autism can be “caused”. What we do have is genetics. Xox a real autistic human woman 🌸
Dear God, my cousin's life has become incredibly difficult as her son has severe autism and cannot communicate and is essentially disabled. Who will care for this child when the parents are gone, that is a very valid fear.
Granting your situation (I assume that Xox is your chromosomal pattern, not sending kisses and hug to the readers), is real but different from many people and families. The rise in incidence of Autism from like 1/10,000 to 1/36 births is hardly explainable by diagnostic ignorance in the past, or differing criteria. Autism is a spectrum (as are many things in medicine), but it is hard to miss that there is something different about an autistic child, especially when there is evidence of personality change and/or developmental regression that the family observes. If that change happens in temporal relationship a vaccine, I think it is not too big a leap to say that the toxicity fo the vaccine led to the change. In this column Jennifer is talking about relationship to prenatal ultrasound which is a harder call to make, except as a possible statistical correlation. I remain agnostic about it. I don't know enough about genetic causes of autism, but again, it is hard to argue that human genetics has changed that much in the last century.
In any case, the definitive or supportive or disproving studies will not be done, as it is too risky for the business of medicine and public health.
And, excuse me this issue has nothing to do with racism and to say that the diagnosis of autism is an ableist invention is dismissive of the challenges that mothers of severely autistic children face, and you need to apologize to those. mothers (I had a family with twin severely autistic boys in my practice, they were as white and blond as you could get. ).
You are correct, autism can irrevocably inflict severe hardship on families. Dr. Chris Exley who is the leading expert on Aluminum, studied the brains of autistic teens, and they had exceedingly high levels of aluminum. He also discovered that the aluminum in vaccines, cross the BBB within a few hours of injection. Anything that causes inflammation in the developing brain can affect 'normal' development resulting in a different developmental trajectory. That is not a personal insult, it is a fact. We have to admit when development is not 'normal' from the perspective of function. It does not mean the harmed individual is 'less than' because they have been harmed, but to deny it for whatever reason, will stunt investigation into cause and cure.
No it’s kisses! And I do not need someone telling me about myself. Autistics are the only people that should be talking about autism because of the racism medical model at play. Flowers to you Roger 🌸 you’re truly insane 💃🏻
I am sorry that you feel that way. I didn't try to tell you about yourself. I was commenting on patients that I know and their families. I would not. presume to tell you about yourself.
yup. that’s the line when I stopped reading. the amount of supportive comments here is disappointing. also that this article was recommended on substack.
I agree. It's so sad to see so many people going against mainstream for-profit medicine. How dare they not support a system that has such poor outcomes and cares so little about their health and wellbeing?
What’s sad is the lack of nuance in conversations, the polarization and demonization of medicine (among other things). I’m not saying it’s a flawless system- believe me, I’ve had my experiences. But oversimplifying arguments, making all-or-nothing statements and weaponizing inconclusive research is not helpful.
I find polarization on nearly every topic. I think healthy skepticism is a good plan, looking at each situation contextually, arm oneself with some solid research, and just do the best we can. Perfection is an illusion.
My wife wanted natural delivery for all out children, but our first daughter was breech. The obstetrician, woman, favored natural deliveries, not c-sections, and saw no need for ultrasounds. My wife said she just didn't feel right, something was wrong, and an ultrasound was done and indicated a footling breech position, the most dangerous for both baby and momma. My wife tried natural several techniques suggested by the obstetrician to have the baby move to a normal or at least buttucks first breech position, a bit safer. Nothing worked. She was recommended to see an obstetrician who was supposedly skilled in manual reversions. I cringed and left the room while the procedure was done. The doctor was convinced he was successful. An ultrasound still showed a footling breech. The original obstetrician said she had successfully delivered breech birthings of all positions, so when my wife went into labor she hoped for a natural delivery as did the doctor, but was prepared for a C-section because of what the ultrasounds revealed. I was in the room when my wifes labor was painful and long, then required an emergency C-section with my wife insisting I stay in the room. Our first born was birthed via C-section and when I saw her, she looked like an angel. Now 36 years later my oldest daughter has given birth to three healthy babies, the first a C-section in the hospital; the next two natural with a mid-wife in her bedroom. My wife went on to have 4 more children, all natural vaginal births. But I recall how helpful we found the ultrasounds for our first child and for my wife. Without them my wife's plan was to give birth in our home, which given the breech position could have ended the life of both my wife and my first daughter.
"My wife said she just didn't feel right, something was wrong, and an ultrasound was done..." yes, yes, a thousand times yes. Your wife knew something wasn't right, the doctor listened to her, and THEN did the testing to help figure out and solve the problem. Prenatal ultrasound is **life-saving** when used appropriately. It should absolutely be used when needed, just like cesarean birth. It's the routine use of ultrasound that is not evidence-based in the absence of palpitating a woman's abdomen and other clinical markers that there may be a problem... Does this make sense, Steve?
Yes, it makes sense. Much depends on the doctors you see and also what is considered acceptable medical practice in the state. After our first daughter's birth my wife decided to have future births in hospital. But she didn't want an episiotomy or pain killers. I wanted what was best for her, but difficult to watch someboy you love in pain. Her first V-Bac, my son, was only 13 months after the C-section with my oldest daughter. My wife wanted to give birth squatting, not lying down. This went against the hospital's policy and we were constrained by insurance as to which hospital we had coverage. Her labor went quickly and I was in the room. I wanted to call the nurse and doctor but my wife said no. She got on the floor, squatted, and pushed. I grabbed the bedding off the bed, plus the pillow, and put them underneath so the baby wouldn't hit the floor head first. As my son's head crowned, dark hair, the nurse came running in and called the doctor. The nurse pushed me aside and took over, completing the birth whilst my wife squatted! The doctor arrived and allowed me to cut the umbilical cord.
Pain isn't inevitable in all births. I think pain is largely a sign of abnormality. I had four births without pain, and only a hour of pain with the final one, because I was exhausted and had labored for over 30 hours. We are taught to expect pain. If we were taught to expect pressure instead, and were not forced to lie on the back, many more women would not experience pain. Lying on the back puts the baby's weight on the arteries that feed the uterus. It is lack of blood flow that causes the pain. Also, a woman should not push, but let the uterus do the work. This will prevent many tears, so no episiotomy would be necessary. As for teaching to expect pain, Lamaze is guilty of this.
Thank you. I wish I had this advice. Way back when. And it is sad how much “old wives tales“ were so much wiser than we are today. We have a family member who nearly aborted, because the doctors assured her that her child was going to be born with multiple birth defects. Luckily, they didn’t listen. The child came out perfect!
That's a chilling story--with a happy ending. So glad she didn't choose abortion. But if she had, she would not have known the baby was perfect. When I went to research birth in Iceland, I was told by the doctors and the midwives that they autopsy every aborted baby so they can have hard data about the accuracy of the testing. We don't do that in America. But we should.
That story comes from the UK, sadly.
THANK YOU for saying this! It needs to be said, and said again. And thank you for mentioning the toxicity of the gel. I looked into this when I had treatments. Because of the toxicity, I used coconut oil instead. But if you want the doctor to use it instead of gel for imaging, he will refuse. Why? It is said to work. And by the way, we shouldn't be using ultrasound if a mother plans to abort if the baby has an anomaly. Why? Because ultrasound can be dead wrong. If the baby is normal, she just got rid of a normal child she wanted. If the baby has an anomaly that doesn't show up, the mother just might sue the doctor! And in any case, it is simply wrong to kill a baby for not being perfect. None of us is perfect. And it devalues those of us with more obvious medical problems. It is the precursor to atrocities of other kinds. If the mother cannot handle a baby with that particular problem, she can choose adoption. She may say it will hurt more to do that than have an abortion, but studies show the opposite is true. I even talked to a woman for some time who had had an abortion because her baby had hydrocephalus. She was an emotional MESS! She told me, 'If I could just have looked into his eyes." And this was at a time when they were doing prenatal surgery for this condition, and we know it is caused by deficiencies in certain B vitamins. Totally ludicrous. My nephew has Down Syndrome. My sister refused a test because she would never consent to an abortion. He is a precious human being, a valued member of the family, deeply loved. And a truly amazing human being. In fact, he has unbelievable skills in language. His language development was even earlier than that of a child who is considered a genius at languages, and later on, I was able to teach him foreign languages very quickly. If we would stop trying to force them into our broken educational system and teach them the way they learn, he could have made a career as an interpreter. His talent has been wasted by our attitudes.
Often people don't realize that the information that doctors are wanting them to have does not serve any purpose except stress unless abortion is on the table. I'm surprised how many doctors push hard for prenatal infanticide. This study in the Journal of Medical Ethics makes many people upset, but it is very interesting and telling and makes an important point ... https://jme.bmj.com/content/39/5/261
By the way. You spoke of the toxicity of the gels. My research revealed that it was the BLUE COLOR that was highly toxic, the rest of it not nearly as much. And the color is totally unnecessary for their purposes.
I do not understand why doctors are tolerating abortionists. Establishment medicine is responsible for the existence of widespread abortion. If they upheld medical ethics and expelled these people from the profession, there would be few left to do abortions. Doctors don't warn people. I once warned a woman against amniocentesis. I said it could cause the baby to develop spinal meningitis. She was planning an abortion if the baby was "found" to be abnormal. The baby was normal. And later developed spinal meningitis. I hate being a prophet for stuff like that! If doctors had stood up against abortionists in the first place, it is highly unlikely there would ever have been any Covid, let alone death shots, and certainly no mandates. Thank you for the link.
Hi, Jennifer, here to brag , neither of our daughters were ultrasounded during my wife’s pregnancy 41 & 44 years ago: after birth they did unfortunately get their share of Tylenol I am sad to say, but I didn’t know any better then (and likely no one else did).
Thanks for linking the Tylenol articles.
I found that a good menstrual history (cycle length, mittleschmertz, regularity, etc. & serial clinical exams (and knowing the fruit scale of uterine size for bimanual exams 8 wk lemon or tennis ball, 10 weeks large orange, 12 weeks grapefruit)helps a lot in prenatal care); still, I confess I was probably too liberal with ordering ultrasounds on my patients, though less so than my OB colleagues.
Thank you for the brag, Dr. Kimber, and also the confession. I appreciate your thoughts about this!
Unfortunately… the narrative has been pushed and pushed for ultrasounds . 3 D ultrasounds are now done as a side hustle by radiology companies and obstetrical offices to make CASH 💰. Yep never have to report a dime ! ACOG has made ultrasounds standard of care for dating the gestation , Anatomy scans and growth . Patients can refuse anytime! I hope they do . Remember there are malpractice attorneys out there when there is a fetal anomaly that was not found and you have a wrongful life case on your hands …. Or a malpositioned birth that needs a stat c-section or fetal distress that’s not acted up quickly enough . Lot to unpack here , thank you . Btw the jab has been the worse thing that was recommended by the ACOG . The side effects have been horrific. Ultrasounds have picked up growth disorders, abruption sand many side effects from the jab .
Thank you for this! My goal is to have a vbac and I would love a homebirth but the state doesn’t allow it because you know, doctors know better than midwives because they are also surgeons (sarcasm). But it means I have to give birth in a hospital and I’m nervous to request no ultrasounds since if they don’t accept me as a patient bc of that (can they reject you for no ultrasounds? I feel like they’d demand it bc of my C-section?), then we may have to go out of state, which is a lot financially and when we have a very energetic toddler
Have you read this article, Dani? It's my all-time favorite piece about VBAC. It was written years ago but I think it will inspire you: http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/12/16/ep.vbac.birth.at.home/index.html. Also the book SIMPLY GIVE BIRTH has many wonderful VBAC stories in it. Finally, this is a fabulous book about VBAC as well (if you like to read): https://jennifermargulis.net/you-can-have-a-vbac2c/ Roanna, who wrote that last book, said she had ultrasounds and made the tech do them with lightening speed so her baby was scanned for the least amount of time possible. She was, um, quite forceful and scared the technician, I think...
I assembled a class and we studied midwifery under a midwife who attended British royalty. One of the students has a sister who had a Caesarean, and she wanted a homebirth. We taught her the massage technique for the scar we learned from the midwife. She went into labor but couldn't give birth because her tailbone was fused and wouldn't move out of the way. The doctor who performed the second Caesarean said the scar from the previous one would never have ruptured in a million years.
Wow thank you!!
Uterine ruptures associated with VBAC or ToLac may , in rare circumstances have a poor outcome.
Ruptures, I think you mean. I have not seen one thank God. There are ruptures and there are ruptures; if a vertical scar ruptures it truly can be catastrophic; low segment transverse scars are less likely to be, which is why VBACs are an option in those situations.
If you meant abruption, then yes, truly they can be catastrophic.
Thanks Roger, both are fraught with challenges medically and surgically.
I opted not to have any ultrasounds with most of my pregnancies... Or so I thought at the time. I didn't realize doppler was also ultrasound. Earlier this month I gave birth at home to my first baby who had had no doppler or ultrasound, except for some doppler during labor to more easily check on baby's well being.
Congratulations on the birth of your baby this month.
I have heard about this before. It makes one wonder if anything the medical community does is really safe. How were billions of humans ever born before all this modern technology? They want us to believe that we could never survive on our own without all this medical tyranny.
I'm generally sympathetic to your point. But it's also true that mortality rates for both mother and child were significantly higher before modern practices. I had five children, the first and last born via C-sections, with 3 VBACs in between.
Due to an undetected uterine anomaly, our first baby would have unavoidably died in utero at 37.5 weeks were it not for the bio-physical profile conducted via ultrasound when she went into distress, and the subsequent emergency C-section that ensued. Also, had those life-saving interventions not existed, I too would have died due to my uterine anomaly, attempting to birth the stillborn baby that would have resulted. So, counting me and my five children, that's 6 humans who exist today because of that technology.
So while I do lean heavily holistic when it comes to health and medicine, but there are ways in which modern medicine has provided miracles in the arena of obstetrics.
EDITED to add: Speaking of childbirth mortality rates, our oldest, a daughter, would herself have died at 34 weeks pregnant with her first, due to HELLP syndrome, were it not for the modern diagnostic, therapeutic, and surgical advances that saved not only her life (again), but also her preterm baby's, who would have died with her. She has since had a second delivery of a healthy child via VBAC. My sister and her second child, due to complications at birth, would also definitively have been mortality statistics were it not for emergency C-sections. So that's actually 10 people in my own family who exist today, who would not have in less modern times.
Pregnant women should run far away from any "medical" test involving any sort of waves, regardless of how "safe" they are assured such a test is. Now that we see all of the disability and death caused by the "safe & effective" Plandemic products, it should be quite clear that no one in any medical field should be automatically trusted to not put their wallet first.
And... what is it like experiential for the baby??? Must be a huge " what the fuck is that???" moment for the baby...
Reportedly, babies turn away from ultrasound, including attempts to get the perfect "picture" of their face.
I've heard this as well. But I don't know if it is true/accurate/explainable. This article says the sound might bother the baby. I guess some smart scientists need to design an experiment to test this hypothesis? https://pathwaystofamilywellness.org/new-edge-science/ultrasound-8-reasons-its-not-safe-or-painless-for-your-developing-child.html
I was denied access to medical care by UCLA and several other obstetricians because I refused an ultrasound. I was 18 weeks pregnant before I found a doctor who would take me as a patient and not insist on the ultrasound. I assured him there was nothing wrong with the pregnancy, I could feel it was fine, I had lost other pregnancies and I saw the losses in dreams prior to the miscarriages, and I had also felt 'off' during those pregnancies. In one dream, I was in a car with little girls who had tumours all over their bodies, one came to me, kissed me on the lips, I still remember the sensation and said to me 'goodbye', I miscarried the following morning. When I was in the UCLA clinic's waiting room, I saw a large fish tank, with a notice not to disturb the fish by touching the glass of the tank. Yet, they insisted I disturb the fetus through the use of penetrating heat waves from ultrasound technology, which can damage the brain. I walked out of the clinic determined to go without medical care if I couldn't find a doctor who would honour my wishes. I continued the same fight to protect my healthy child from the propaganda assaults to inject babies with vaccines that contain all manner of harmful ingredients, depriving the development of natural immunity for life against a host of infectious diseases. The whole medical system needs to change, when docs financially benefit from dangerous practices, they will continue them. Few are ethical.
Oh Rita. Your experience with all of this really touches my heart. Such a good point about the fish tank. It's so hard to stand firm. And so so necessary. I couldn't agree with you more that the system needs a massive overhaul. We need to put babies and moms first, not money.
Yes. Also, I was treated poorly and rudely by the medical system for going against the protocols they demand for our own bodies. During covid I had to go to the ER, not for a respiratory illness though. Both nurses guilted me for not having taken the shot, while they were present, an official from Cedars came in demanding to know why I did not take the shot. I was in shock at the tactics. I had to explain myself, by saying a family member was injured, which was true, to shut them up. Now that we know the various mechanisms by which those mRNA shots can cause cancer, prion disease, cardiac damage and death particularly in teen boys, what would those nurses say. If I had caved to the pressure, and developed an autoimmune condition, how would those coercive nurses help me now. Sorry, would not be enough. The medical paradigm is changing for the wealthy. My own functional doctor will no longer accept insurance, and is switching to a concierge practice, 4 visits annually for $15k plus all you can 'eat' urgent calls. I can't afford that on top of insurance. Our family cardiologist has done the same, so another $25K a year on top of insurance, it is a medical system for the wealthy now. The rest of us who depend on insurance will get 15 minutes, 10 of those maybe with a PA, and then a pill that won't cure. And, Pfizer is working toward eliminating the middleman the internist, by selling drugs through their own centers to the patient. How often does one go to a nutritionist when feeling unwell, not often, is it even covered by insurance, it should be, because that is where a reversal can begin.
Thanks Jennifer. Never heard this before, but it isn’t surprising given the edifice of lies that much of medicine has become.
Jennifer, Do you have any information on the "vitamin K" shot administered at birth. I heard that it has aluminum and adjuvants.
Heya Marjory, you can find information about the vitamin K shot in our book, The Vaccine-Friendly Plan. There are at least 3 different brands on the market. We looked at the ingredients and at least one contains aluminum. A very good alternative (besides simply saying no, thank you) is oral vitamin K. We also discuss that in the book, and reference a few solid science studies. You should be able to get a copy from any local library. Full disclosure: We opted OUT of vitamin K and did not use oral drops for all 4 of our babies (only the first one was born in the hospital, the next 3 were all born at home).
Hi Jennifer, Thank you for sharing information about the vitamin K shot. I am looking forward to reading more about it in your book! It is reassuring to know that you chose to opt OUT of vitamin K for your three children born at home. I would be interested in knowing if there is any compelling reason to give the oral vitamin K when one is circumcising a baby. That is a whole other complicated topic. Thanks again.
Yes. We also write about circumcision in The V-F Plan. And I devote an entire chapter to it in my book Your Baby, Your Way. I've also written many articles about it. Here is one to have a look at, if you're so inclined: https://jennifermargulis.net/one-in-500-newborn-boys-experience-acute-complications-from-circumcision/
Thank you so much, Jennifer, for the article and for referring me to the chapter in your book, Your Baby, Your Way. I greatly appreciate your responsiveness to my interest in learning more about the topic of circumcision.
Definitely an interesting perspective on such a routine, ubiquitous medical procedure used during pregnancy. I delivered two healthy babies after uncomplicated pregnancies, although both were ever-so-slightly preterm, and I underwent all of the recommended ultrasounds.
It is eye-opening, therefore, to learn that these procedures are potentially dangerous to mothers and their unborn babies. A bit alarming, actually. It truly calls into question the legitimacy of the need for many routine medical procedures, and while most doctors have their patients' best interests at heart, there are certainly always incentives influencing their medical advice and treatment.
That being said, this is a refreshing reminder to educate ourselves on our healthcare decisions, and those of our providers. It certainly doesn't entirely blacklist ultrasounds in my book, but it is important to weigh all the benefits and potential risks when making any medical decision, especially during pregnancy.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. It makes sense that the heat from sound waves as well as the waves themselves could cause harm to a rapidly developing fetal brain. Any intervention in pregnancy carries risk. Sometimes it is necessary, I prefer to err on the side of caution.
Woah there...I'm going to admit I didn't finish reading this...but I need to pull a flag here...you are making a claim that sonographers don't understand, but you link to an article with only 22 sonographers as part of the sample where only 22 participants were able to show understanding....going to hazard it was the sonographers.
I am a sonographer. We do understand, most of are registered and have degrees on the use of ultrasound. I also know other users (doctors, midwives, nurses )don't as much, so I wouldn't want an fetal ultrasound from just anyone (some are very knowledgeable and more and more included in didactics). There are very clear guidelines for scanning time length based on body part and mechanical index guidelines based on body part being imaged.
I wholeheartedly disagree with a ultrasound without a valid medical reason (ie-entertainment ultrasounds), however there recently has been a lot of fear mongering that has led to people not receiving appropriate medical care. So please be careful of the blanket term sonographer for all users of ultrasound as it is wholly incorrect.
I'm sorry this article triggered you so much, Jodi. But very grateful that you were willing to chime in and share your thoughts here. Dr. Casanova told me about several studies that showed that machines are often mis-calibrated and that sonographers are not aware of the concept of ALARA, that is, setting machines on “as low as reasonably achievable” for measurements. This is backed up by pregnant women's experiences, that the techs tend to linger, print out extra photos, etc. The truth is that it **is** fun to see the baby and it may well help with early bonding. So I think the techs take their time because the mamas often *want* them to and request it. Everyone leaves happy. But as Dr. Casanova has said, with great sadness in his voice, it's not just a pretty picture. His grandson with autism recently died. He is so bereft. It's just a hypothesis at this point (as all science is if we are doing real science) but if prenatal ultrasound is contributing to autism in some susceptible children, we need to take action. Also, your criticism of the article is totally fair -- both that the N in the study I quoted was quite small **and** that we should not be critiquing professionals in a blanket way. Thank you for pointing this out.
I appreciate your comment 'in some susceptible'. It's obvious not all sonos or vaccines cause autism. I have one really "interesting" daughter-in-law who's always been a 1000% against vaccines. I used to promote them. Totally ignorant to ingredients or that the list from when my son's got them quadrupled! My other daughter-in-law is a sonographer and wonderful. Her oldest son was a little different from get go, but thriving and expressive! Then he got his 6 month vaccines and everything changed. It was devastating. She had actually even inquired to doctor of the safety ofso many vaccines at once. As you probably hear every single day and experienced yourself...he did not react well and stated if you're worried we can spilt them up a couple weeks apart. Her and I EVERY DAY wish she'd said piss off and left. My grandson, as you can imagine, has had a rough go. However, his mother, has been diligent and advocates for him continually! I could not be prouder of her! I babysat him twice a week for a few years while she worked. He and I have a bond like no other! He's almost 9 now. He is definitely different in some ways, but he's ridiculously smart (almost annoyingly! lol), he's loving, and expressive! His life will never be easy. People are cruel. I stated I appreciated susceptible because I can see in other family members it may have been something genetic. My "interesting" daughter-in-law says most children with autism have the MFT something gene. Makes me think mutha effer every time I see it. 🤭🤷♀️ So I'm not a scientists... LOL I'm not positive about the Tylenol thing...unless something in it has changed alot...like vax's. 🥴🙄 But not that it causing Autism would shock or surprise me either. I honestly felt like it was a ploy to pull focus off of vaccines. My mother used to say...it's not the mistakes we make, but what we learn from them. Sometimes that would give me comfort. It didn't when it came to vaccines. Keep writing. Keep getting the word out. You have the gift of being gracious regardless. I don't have that quality. 😬😁 God gave me looks not the gift of patience or sugar coating! 🤣🤣🤣 jk...kinda...at least about the good looks part! Gramma's getting old. lol
I'm so sorry about your grandson's difficult go of things. He sounds like an amazing kid. Feels like that didn't need to happen. Thank you for reminding us all that we need to be nuanced and see the individual. That's what gets lost with blanket recommendations ("requirements") that come down from the Oh So High and Mighty Health Authorities. The only real authority on any given person's health is that person...
Amen!
The problem is doctors are given vaccine information from the makers of the vaccines. Conflicts of interest result in corruption. Leaning into a super busy doctor for information on vaccines, that he did not learn in college is not productive. Unfortunately, since their education on harms is very limited, parents have to spend the time to dig deep on the science themselves. We should not have to do that, but since pharma is in control, we have to.
I agree except you can't tell me they don't see first hand vaccine damage CONSTANTLY! At some point they are just ignoring it and pushing them anyway. It doesn't take college nor research to just look around and use some common sense!
Pediatricians may not be able to afford to run their offices without the financial incentives from vaccinating kids, it can amount to about a million dollars a year. So, there is plenty of incentive for doctors to refuse to connect the dots. Humans are selfish. Children are sacrificed. Freedom isn't free, we as parents have to fight to change the system, complacency results in our canoe drifting toward the waterfall. It takes intense rowing against the flow to get to the safety of shore. Most people won't invest that kind of energy into it. However, the autism pandemic is a result of our oversight.
Jennifer, I do agree with you that rules around the usage of Ultrasound are far two lax. Guidelines are often ignored. And it’s very clear that many Ultrasound techs and even obstetricians don’t understand and practice correct parameters. I’ve seen far too numerous posts where babies heartbeats are being checked during the first trimester with spectrum Doppler, which is strictly against the stance of the AIUM. It just gets ignored. And unfortunately, a lot of sonographers are following the orders of the doctors because they don’t want to risk losing their jobs, and parents are just trusting that their doctor knows best.
I do think there is a middle grounds when it comes to Ultrasound and a lot more conversations need to happen. I don’t agree with not doing ANY routine Ultrasound, but I feel like people need to be more educated on what their doctors don’t actually know about proper Ultrasound use. Most obstetricians are merely trained on how to use the machine with zero or little knowledge on the possible bio-effects.
Regarding the gel: When I was an ultrasound school, I was simultaneously going through treatment for breast cancer and was becoming much more aware of endocrine disruptors, etc. And I was also very concerned about the ingredients in the ultrasound gel. I found no alternatives to use. I have heard some people will use aloe gel. However, because of the materials on the transducer (the Ultrasound probe) most offices will not accept substitutes for the gel because they are worried about any possible risk of the breakdown of the materials on the probe.
I would love to see somebody create an ultrasound gel that is actually safe and nontoxic, I’m just not sure there would be a big enough concern by the medical industry for it.
Very useful information. The same with vaccines, doctors receive little education on their potential for harm, and they are also financially incentivized to push them.
That should have read “spectral Doppler.”
Good morning Jennifer,
I wouldn't say triggered at all, disappointed would be more appropriate. I can't speak to the calibration aspect. I have worked at places where biomedical team perform quality assurance and repairs. I will even agree that there should be more oversite on machines need updated and replaced...we all know how cheap most hospitals are and how they hate replacing equipment...
I can say without a doubt just about no sonographer lingers and creating a bonding experience. That again sound like an entertainment establishment.
I am so grateful I didn't go onto OB based on the stories that have been shared with me. Additionally, most of us are so overworked, we are working on pain daily. 90% of sonographer are injured and scanning in pain by about 10 years if my
memory serves. Many are burnt out and overworked.
I am sorry this Dr's grandson passed, but I am going to stand for my profession here.
If anyone us concerned about the training their sonographer has recieved, there are credentialing bodies and you are welome to ask. My credentials are on my nametag like most.
Sonographer here too who is very anti-medical establishment and generally agrees with the author on most of her content, but I agree with this comment. I too think that ultrasounds are majorly overused and wish there was a way to shut down ultrasound boutiques, but I also don’t think it’s safe to promote not doing them at all. There would a lot of life threatening things missed. Imagine a child being born vaginally who had an organ outside its body, which would have been caught during an anatomy scan but the mother avoided ultrasound. It would be devastating. Even more so in a home birth setting.
Thanks for weighing in Jacquelyn. Here in America we had better birth outcomes before the widespread use of ultrasounds, for both babies and for mamas. Our numbers (infant and maternal mortality, as well as near-misses, etc.) have been going in the wrong direction for years. I explore this in much more detail in my book, Your Baby, Your Way. Please don't misunderstand me: you may be right about ultrasounds. Perhaps the reasons for the downward trends are more because of vaccines and overly aggressive medical management of labor or because women are not as healthy as they were in the 1960s and 1970s. I don't know. But I have interviewed several women who had or were offered very long-lasting ultrasounds at every single prenatal visit and were not informed of any downsides. I believe that women know when something is amiss. And doctors and midwives who pay attention will spot what the women might not. So a more evidence-based model would be that we don't do them routinely but that we do use them when they're actually necessary.
I'm curious how that discovery during an anatomy scan would make a difference in terms of the medical outcome for the baby? I get the idea that it would save the parents the trauma of discovery at birth. But would it change the clinical outcome for the baby?
As I write about in my book, Your Baby, Your Way (see page 31), one study of 15,151 pregnant women published in the New England Journal of Medicine compared pregnant women who received 2 scans to pregnant women who received scans ONLY when some other medical indication suggested it was necessary. The results showed NO difference in fetal outcomes... The same team found, however, that routine ultrasounds led to much more expensive prenatal care, to the tune of $1 billion a year...
I think we have to take each situation on a case-by-case basis. Routinely doing any medical procedure has drawbacks. For decades docs didn't know that routine antibiotic prescriptions harmed the microbiome which is a major regulator in the body, and some microbiota were destroyed permanently. I don't say, never vax, never do an ultrasound, never take a steroid, these interventions have risks, but the less we need them, the better it seems to me anyway.
An interesting read until “the disturbing rise of autism” was flung around. The “rise” of autism has far more to do with people actually having an understanding of diagnostic criteria and people actually diagnosing women and POC. Not just little white boys and their parents that feel autism “stole” their child.
Not eugenic ableist fear mongering fuel. Insanely insensitive.
Thanks for your comment. This study shows that the rise in autism is not just due to better diagnostic criteria: https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-069X-13-73
I’m very well aware of the study. It’s lobbed around often. Medicine in an intensely racist and ableist field and that study proves just that. Autism is not something anyone needs to fear in a child it is a difference not a deficit. We have absolutely 0 evidence autism can be “caused”. What we do have is genetics. Xox a real autistic human woman 🌸
Dear God, my cousin's life has become incredibly difficult as her son has severe autism and cannot communicate and is essentially disabled. Who will care for this child when the parents are gone, that is a very valid fear.
Phoebe,
Granting your situation (I assume that Xox is your chromosomal pattern, not sending kisses and hug to the readers), is real but different from many people and families. The rise in incidence of Autism from like 1/10,000 to 1/36 births is hardly explainable by diagnostic ignorance in the past, or differing criteria. Autism is a spectrum (as are many things in medicine), but it is hard to miss that there is something different about an autistic child, especially when there is evidence of personality change and/or developmental regression that the family observes. If that change happens in temporal relationship a vaccine, I think it is not too big a leap to say that the toxicity fo the vaccine led to the change. In this column Jennifer is talking about relationship to prenatal ultrasound which is a harder call to make, except as a possible statistical correlation. I remain agnostic about it. I don't know enough about genetic causes of autism, but again, it is hard to argue that human genetics has changed that much in the last century.
In any case, the definitive or supportive or disproving studies will not be done, as it is too risky for the business of medicine and public health.
And, excuse me this issue has nothing to do with racism and to say that the diagnosis of autism is an ableist invention is dismissive of the challenges that mothers of severely autistic children face, and you need to apologize to those. mothers (I had a family with twin severely autistic boys in my practice, they were as white and blond as you could get. ).
Have a pleasant night.
You are correct, autism can irrevocably inflict severe hardship on families. Dr. Chris Exley who is the leading expert on Aluminum, studied the brains of autistic teens, and they had exceedingly high levels of aluminum. He also discovered that the aluminum in vaccines, cross the BBB within a few hours of injection. Anything that causes inflammation in the developing brain can affect 'normal' development resulting in a different developmental trajectory. That is not a personal insult, it is a fact. We have to admit when development is not 'normal' from the perspective of function. It does not mean the harmed individual is 'less than' because they have been harmed, but to deny it for whatever reason, will stunt investigation into cause and cure.
Roger - thank you
No it’s kisses! And I do not need someone telling me about myself. Autistics are the only people that should be talking about autism because of the racism medical model at play. Flowers to you Roger 🌸 you’re truly insane 💃🏻
I am sorry that you feel that way. I didn't try to tell you about yourself. I was commenting on patients that I know and their families. I would not. presume to tell you about yourself.
Have a pleasant evening.
yup. that’s the line when I stopped reading. the amount of supportive comments here is disappointing. also that this article was recommended on substack.
I agree. It's so sad to see so many people going against mainstream for-profit medicine. How dare they not support a system that has such poor outcomes and cares so little about their health and wellbeing?
What’s sad is the lack of nuance in conversations, the polarization and demonization of medicine (among other things). I’m not saying it’s a flawless system- believe me, I’ve had my experiences. But oversimplifying arguments, making all-or-nothing statements and weaponizing inconclusive research is not helpful.
I find polarization on nearly every topic. I think healthy skepticism is a good plan, looking at each situation contextually, arm oneself with some solid research, and just do the best we can. Perfection is an illusion.
I think your last sentence is insensitive. Why mention skin colour in such a sarcastic way?