I have discussed this subject with many people (who are stunned by this idea) and believe with Joan Swirsky that sonograms may be one major cause in the rise and prevalence of autism.
I am not a health professional just a mother, grandmother and thinking person.
When my daughter was expecting I wondered why she had so many sonograms and felt very uneasy about them. Luckily her children are fine.
However, I have always felt alone in my beliefs until reading this article and am amazed that research organizations, T.V. doctors and pediatricians have not done more on the effects of sonograms on the fetus. It certainly seems like common sense that it may be a trigger under certain circumstances such as frequency and timing.
Most women have at least three sonograms per pregnancy. Now is this in the best interest of the child or to protect the doctor?
I too realized that the rising incidence of autism and use of sonograms across the board began at the same time. This cannot be a coincidence.
People have become obsessed with monitoring and only see it as a positive. There has to be a balance. My knowledge tells me that the developing fetus is extremely sensitive to many things ingested my its mother.
I ask you, if tunafish is considered harmful can sonograms be safer?
I hope that these observations will lead to better information, and thank Ms. Swirsky for enlightening us on this serious topic.
Iris Cohn
New Hyde Park
