Someone told me this - do you think it's true?

[~*Leanne*~]

Well you know i have booked my 2nd 4D scan for next Monday

OH's brother's girlfriend txt OH when she found out and said that her friend had a 4D scan and her baby was born without any finger nails becuase of the scan.

TBH i cant see this being true - she is someone who totally exagerates and also knows people who tend to lie about things etc etc - so im just thinking she is saying it because she probably wont be having one with her baby!!!

Do you think they are safe? i have read up on the net and everything points to it being safe - just wondered what you girls think?

X

 

[Jimmer]

Hiya!

Just been looking round on the net - seem to be a few scare stories around, but for all the 'sensible' sites I found the general impression seems to be that there is no evidence of causing problems, but that in the usual manner of being overcautious, some seem to be saying it is not wise to have too many scans as the 4d / 3d scans are still a relatively new technology.

Yet another of those 'in moderation' things!!!

Suppose the person to really answer would be your doc.

Jimmer

 

[Melly+2]

sorry but thats a load of balls, you will be fine hun, they wouldnt give you them if they thought they caused a threat to your baby

 

[~*Leanne*~]

sorry but thats a load of balls, you will be fine hun, they wouldnt give you them if they thought they caused a threat to your baby

that's what i thought!!

 

[Chrissy1]

personally I think it's a crock of crap!! I know that 3D/4D scans are relatively new technology and there's still research going on but if there were any immediate danger to the baby they wouldn't be allowed to do them.

The only thing I would do is limit the number you have only because the research is so new

 

[Melly+2]

[quote="Mel&Bean":1bsen8op] sorry but thats a load of balls, you will be fine hun, they wouldnt give you them if they thought they caused a threat to your baby

that's what i thought!! [/quote:1bsen8op]
you go enjoy it sweetie you deserve it

 

[lea m]

If anything was to go wrong by them I wouldnt have thought it would be loss of fingernails!?
As others have said, they wouldnt give them to pregnant women if there was a risk to unborn babies!!

 

[Alicebabe]

The only thing I would say is that I work with a radiologist who wouldn't let his wife have a 4d scan when she was pregnant because he said it was a high dose of radiation - and he should know!

 

[charlotteheys85]

i've not heard of this, but will do a little bit of research as i've got mine on the aug xxx

 

[clairedoran]

I know loads of women who have had them over the past few years and all babies were born
healthy, and with fingernails!! xx

 

[Daggers]

Hiya, can't say weather this is total bollocks, but we had a 4D scan done and our boy was born as healthy can be. Also I was told that this is the technology the NHS will be using as some point - once they can afford it I presume.
Hope your scan went well, we loved every minute of it!
Dx

 

[Melly+2]

The only thing I would say is that I work with a radiologist who wouldn't let his wife have a 4d scan when she was pregnant because he said it was a high dose of radiation - and he should know!

How come they advertise them then, surly if they wernt safe they wouldnt do them?? Never heard of them giving off radiation, how strange

 

[hennaly]

Until there is any proof these things are dangerous they will continue to advertise them, i did intend on having one but must admit i will do a bit more research now before i decide, its got me thinking that maybe it could cause future damage too.

 

[Leanne&Bump]

There is nothing saying it could harm your baby its a pile of shite if you ask me! Ill let you know if my baby has finger nails
Na there is no evidence to say it could harm your baby - well not that i know of anyway . . Go and have one its great

 

[Anna23]

Well my mum is a midwife (but not practing it atm) and i'll ask her as i'm sure she'll know

 

[~*Leanne*~]

The only thing I would say is that I work with a radiologist who wouldn't let his wife have a 4d scan when she was pregnant because he said it was a high dose of radiation - and he should know!

I just found this :-

Safety of 3D/4D Scans
That brings us neatly to where we started. Is it safe? A 4D scan is as safe as the conventional 2D scan. Ultrasound scans, unlike X-rays or CT scan, do not employ any form of radiation.

The only theoretical risk is that of raised temperature. It is a well known scientific fact that the sound waves do cause a rise of temperature in the tissues where they pass through. The rise in temperature is dependent on acoustic power and scan duration. All modern scanners display what is known as a Thermal Index (TI). The index tells the operator about any change in tissue temperature. It is displayed continuously on the screen and therefore the operator stays within the accepted safe Thermal Index range.

There is solid evidence that elevation of temperature by 1.5°C above normal (37°C) is perfectly safe. In practice, this is rarely reached. It is also true that, in theory, the tissue temperature needs to rise to about 41°C to have the potential of causing harm. It is virtually impossible to reach this temperature in regular pregnancy ultrasound scanning.

In summary, apart from this visual evidence, it is known that the acoustic outputs produced by regular B-mode ultrasound are NOT high enough to produce harmful effects. The same is true of 3D/4D ultrasound.

A mother going for a 3D/4D ultrasound baby scan can look forward to a breathtaking experience at ease in the secure knowledge that she is not causing harm to her baby.

 

[x Naomi x]

Well my midwife had a 4d scan at the same place as me i dont think she would have done if there was any harm!

 

[hennaly]

The only thing I would say is that I work with a radiologist who wouldn't let his wife have a 4d scan when she was pregnant because he said it was a high dose of radiation - and he should know!

I just found this :-

Safety of 3D/4D Scans
That brings us neatly to where we started. Is it safe? A 4D scan is as safe as the conventional 2D scan. Ultrasound scans, unlike X-rays or CT scan, do not employ any form of radiation.

The only theoretical risk is that of raised temperature. It is a well known scientific fact that the sound waves do cause a rise of temperature in the tissues where they pass through. The rise in temperature is dependent on acoustic power and scan duration. All modern scanners display what is known as a Thermal Index (TI). The index tells the operator about any change in tissue temperature. It is displayed continuously on the screen and therefore the operator stays within the accepted safe Thermal Index range.

There is solid evidence that elevation of temperature by 1.5°C above normal (37°C) is perfectly safe. In practice, this is rarely reached. It is also true that, in theory, the tissue temperature needs to rise to about 41°C to have the potential of causing harm. It is virtually impossible to reach this temperature in regular pregnancy ultrasound scanning.

In summary, apart from this visual evidence, it is known that the acoustic outputs produced by regular B-mode ultrasound are NOT high enough to produce harmful effects. The same is true of 3D/4D ultrasound.

A mother going for a 3D/4D ultrasound baby scan can look forward to a breathtaking experience at ease in the secure knowledge that she is not causing harm to her baby.

can i ask where this research came from?

 

[AL1S0N]

codswallop! Surely ultrasounds use sound waves, not radio waves!!!