In Britain four times as many left-handers are born now, compared to 100 years ago. Ultrasounds safe?????

"Are older mothers more likely to have left or right-handed children? The older the mother the higher the chance she'll have a left hander. We don't know why, but with the number of older mums increasing, so are the numbers of left-handed bubs. In Britain four times as many left-handers are born now, compared to 100 years ago." It is interesting that no one realizes that older fathers are the important factor.

Left-handedness is probably due to the old father. Non-familial left-handedness goes along with autism, schizophrenia, and other brain development problems.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2461315.ece

Dr. Joseph Mercola: http://www.mercola.com/2001/dec/19/ultrasound.htm
Swedish researchers found that if a pregnant woman had an ultrasound scan, her chances of giving birth to a left-handed child were raised by 30%.

While some researchers have linked left-handedness to talents such as creativity with art and languages, others have suggested its effects may be less benign. Recent Dutch research indicated that left-handed women may be twice as likely to die from breast cancer.
Ultrasound Scans Linked to Brain Damage in Babies

By Robert Matthews

Evidence suggesting that ultrasound scans on pregnant women cause brain damage in their unborn babies has been uncovered by scientists.

In the most comprehensive study yet on the effect of the scanning, doctors have found that men born to mothers who underwent scanning were more likely to show signs of subtle brain damage.

During the 1990s, a number of studies hinted that ultrasound scanning affected unborn babies. Research has suggested that subtle brain damage can cause people who ought genetically to be right-handed to become left-handed. In addition, these people face a higher risk of conditions ranging from learning difficulties to epilepsy.

Now a team of Swedish scientists has confirmed the earlier reports on the effects of ultrasound with the most compelling evidence yet that unborn babies are affected by the scanning. They compared almost 7,000 men whose mothers underwent scanning in the 1970s with 170,000 men whose mothers did not, looking for differences in the rates of left- and right-handedness.

The team found that men whose mothers had scans were significantly more likely to be left-handed than normal, pointing to a higher rate of brain damage while in the womb. Crucially, the biggest difference was found among those born after 1975, when doctors introduced a second scan later in pregnancy. Such men were 32 per cent more likely to be left-handed than those in the control group.

Reporting their findings in the journal Epidemiology, the researchers warned that scans in late pregnancy were now routine in many countries.

The present results suggest a 30 per cent increase in risk of left-handedness among boys pre-natally exposed to ultrasound. If this association reflects brain injury, this means as many as one in 50 male fetuses pre-natally exposed to ultrasound are affected.

Other doctors and scientists caution that until further studies are carried out, scanning should still be regarded as safe by mothers-to-be. If confirmed, however, the findings would mean that ultrasound scans are causing slight brain damage in thousands of babies in Britain each year.

Ultrasound scans, which were introduced in the 1960s, have long been regarded as a safe means of checking on the health of unborn children. The scanners use high-frequency sound waves to give X-ray-like images of the inside of the womb, but without using radiation, which carries a risk of causing cancer. Between the 1960s and today, the number of pregnant women having scans in western Europe has increased from a handful to virtually all of them.

Normally, left-handedness is genetic: the likelihood of two left-handed parents having a left-handed child is 35 per cent, while for two right-handed parents, it is only nine per cent. It is when the incidence of left-handedness begins to rise above these normal rates that scientists become concerned that brain damage of some kind could be a factor.

Other surveys have shown that premature babies are five times more likely than normal to be left-handed. According to the Swedish researchers, the human brain undergoes critical development until relatively late in pregnancy, making it vulnerable to damage. In addition, the male brain is especially at risk, as it continues to develop later than the female brain.

The growing evidence that ultrasound affects unborn babies may cast new light on the puzzling rise in left-handedness over recent years.

In Britain, the rate has more than doubled, from five per cent in the 1920s to 11 per cent today. Researchers have estimated that only 20 per cent of this rise can be put down to the suppression of left-handedness among the older generation.

Dr Francis Duck of the British Medical Ultrasound Society will chair a discussion of the results at the international meeting of ultrasound experts being held this week in Edinburgh. "When the first study suggesting a link came out, it was possible to ignore it, but now this is the third," he said. "What it demonstrates is the need to investigate the link further, and to look at possible mechanisms."

Dr Duck cautioned, however, that ultrasound scanning has saved the lives of countless babies: "This research must be seen in context, and it should not deter anyone from having an antenatal scan."

Beverley Beech, the chairman of the Association for Improvements in Maternity Services, criticized doctors for insisting for years that ultrasound was totally safe.

"I am not sure at all that the benefits of ultrasound scans outweigh the downsides," said Ms Beech. "We should be advising women to think very, very carefully before they have scans at all."

www.news.telegraph.co.uk December 9, 2001

Epidemiology December 2001 12:618


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Mercola's Comment:

This is certainly not new information, as I reported on this over two years ago, but the evidence seems quite compelling now to avoid ultrasounds during pregnancy unless they are absolutely necessary.

Currently in the UK, women typically have one or two ultrasonic scans during pregnancy, although more can be recommended to track a particular condition in the fetus.

I never did OB in my practice, but I suspect that the recommendation is similar in the U.S.

It sure seems that the time for routine ultrasound examinations has come and gone.

How ultrasound could affect the brain is still a mystery though. Some researchers suspect that a process called cavitation - where small bubbles in the body fluids vibrate in the ultrasonic waves - could influence brain development.

In the early stage of pregnancy, neurons migrate from the center of the brain and this could be disturbed by ultrasound, perhaps through cavitation.

Related Articles:

Ultrasound Scans May Harm Unborn Babies

Ultrasound.... Safe? http://www.mercola.com/2001/dec/19/ultrasound.htm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is very possible that Paternal Age is the Major Predictor for autism---Harry Fisch, MD

Harry Fisch is the author of The Male Biological Clock, The Patient's Guide to Vasectomy Reversal, The Patient's Guide to Varicocele Repair and Managing The Vasectomy Patient. He is one of the nation's leaders in the diagnosis and treatment of male infertility and microsurgical vasectomy reversal. Dr. Fisch is director of the Male Reproductive Center and directs urologic microsurgery in the Department of Urology at Columbia University Medical Center of New York Presbyterian Hospital in New York City. He is also professor of clinical urology at Columbia University, where he was recently named Teacher of the Year in his department.
For over fifteen years, Dr. Fisch has focused his research, practice, and surgery on male infertility and reproduction.




From the Psychology Today article:


"Everybody was familiar with the concept of women's biological clock, but when we introduced 'male' to the equation, the reaction was 'What are you talking about? Men can have children at any age,'" recalls urologist Harry Fisch, director of the Male Reproductive Center at Columbia Presbyterian Hospital in New York City and author of The Male Biological Clock. "It became a social issue. Men do not like to be told they have a problem."
Nonetheless, a virtual tidal wave of recent research has made it irrefutable: Not only does male fertility decrease decade by decade, especially after age 35, but aging sperm can be a significant and sometimes the only cause of severe health and developmental problems in offspring, including autism, schizophrenia, and cancer. The older the father, the higher the risk. But what's truly noteworthy is not that infertility increases with age—to some degree, we've known that all along—but rather that older men who can still conceive may have such damaged sperm that they put their offspring at risk for many types of disorders and disabilities.
"Men thought they were getting off scot free, and they weren't. The birth defects caused by male aging are significant conditions that can cause a burden to families and society," says Ethylin Wang Jabs, professor of pediatric genetics at Johns Hopkins University and leader of a recent study showing the link between aging paternity and certain facial deformities in offspring. "We now know that men and women alike could be increasing the risk of infertility or birth defects by waiting too long to have children." In other words, by looking for perfection in your life before you conceive, there's a very real chance you'll have less perfect kids."
In the past several years, studies worldwide have found that with each passing decade of their lives and with each insult they inflict on their bodies, men's fertility decreases, while genetic risk to offspring slowly mounts. The range of findings is staggering: Several studies have shown that the older the man, the more fragmented the DNA in his ejaculated sperm, resulting in greater risk for infertility, miscarriage or birth defects. Investigations out of Israel, Europe, and the United States have shown that non-verbal (performance) intelligence may decline exclusively due to greater paternal age; that up to a third of all cases of schizophrenia are linked to increasing paternal age; and that men 40 and older are nearly six times more likely to have offspring with autism than men under age 30. Other research shows that the risk of breast and prostate cancer in offspring increases with paternal age. "



------------------------


This is why autism and 100s of other disorders are rapidly rising:


By Rick Brewer
Record Staff Writer
October 23, 2007 6:00 AM
Jerry Syrovatka says that at 51 he can still run circles around his 8-year-old daughter and 4-year-old son.

But who knows how long that will last?

The Weston Ranch resident is part of a growing phenomenon among baby boomers: men who father children well past the age of 40.

Dr Richard Halvorsen, raises his concerns - warning that the Government "misleads us about vaccines".

Vaccinations: the debate
Saturday, July 28, 2007

By Gabrielle Fagan

Vaccinating our children is a routine part of protecting them from illness in childhood - but a new book queries whether it is worth the risk.


Dr Andrew Wakefield, who challenged the safety of the MMR vaccine because of fears over a possible link to autism, is currently fighting to save his career. Meanwhile the Government insists vaccines are essential and save millions of lives.

The result is that many parents are anxious and confused about the best course of action. And now another doctor, Dr Richard Halvorsen, raises his concerns - warning that the Government "misleads us about vaccines".

Author of a new book, The Truth About Vaccines, he claims that UK children are being used as "guinea pigs" and given "unnecessary" jabs for illnesses such as mumps, and a vaccine for whooping cough which has been "ineffective" in stamping out the illness.................





The pros and cons of vaccinations
DR Halvorsen looks at the case for and against controversial vaccines, but he says firmly: "Before making any final decisions, you are advised to consult a health professional about the specific needs of your child."

MMR (Measles, Mumps and Rubella)

Dr Halvorsen believes the vaccine serves little purpose and points out that: "MMR is the first and only vaccine to contain three live viruses. The studies to look for potential problems that this previously untried combination might cause have never been done."

And he believes that in view of the controversy over suggested links to autism, the MMR should be withdrawn until adequate long-term safety studies on sufficient numbers of children can demonstrate its safety.

He analyses its individual elements:

MEASLES

Measles used to kill more people than smallpox, scarlet fever and diphtheria combined, but improved nutrition and hygiene meant that by the mid-1950s deaths dropped to around 100 per year.

Despite claims vaccination of 95% of the population would eradicate the disease, there have been outbreaks in schools where 99% of children have been vaccinated, writes Dr Halvorsen.

"Measles 4vaccine can cause permanent brain damage and SSPE (rare but fatal brain disease), though almost certainly less commonly than 'naturally caught' measles."

HIS VERDICT: On balance the risks of the disease remain greater than those associated with the vaccine, especially in vulnerable children with chronic illnesses.

MUMPS

It is a mild disease that rarely kills; most people get a slight swelling of the facial and neck glands and are then immune for life.

Because immunity wears off, giving the vaccine has resulted in raising the age which children catch mumps from early childhood to adolescence, where the symptoms are more likely to be severe and can include permanent hearing loss, a painful swelling of testicles and possible infertility, says Dr Halvorsen.

He also suggests that the mumps vaccine is less effective as part of MMR, than the single jab.

HIS VERDICT: This vaccination is unnecessary and the MMR vaccine is making the disease worse.

RUBELLA

The vaccine was introduced to save babies being born with deformities as a result of mothers catching the disease while pregnant, but even before MMR was introduced only 30 babies a year were damaged by rubella.

A Finnish study showed that after two MMR jabs, a third of girls lost all protection by age 15.

HIS VERDICT: Not recommended for children, and it would be more effective to screen teenage girls to check if they've acquired immunity and vaccinate only those who don't have it.

HPV

This is aimed at the "Human Papilloma Virus" which causes genital warts that can result in cervical cancer.

A new HPV vaccination programme has been recommended by health authorities for 12-year-old girls and could start across the UK in autumn 2008, subject to a review. The plan is to vaccinate girls before they have time to become infected with HPV, which is sexually transmitted.

In trials it has only prevented the pre-cancerous changes to cells rather than cancer itself, and it only protects against the two types of HPV that cause 70% of this cancer.

HIS VERDICT: Some women in trials of the vaccine developed potential auto-immune disorders - mainly arthritis-related. This vaccine looks promising but it is too early to introduce it on a national scale.

ALUMINIUM

Dr Halvorsen also has concerns about aluminium which is present in most childhood vaccines. He says: "It's highly toxic, is known to cause brain damage and has been implicated in behavioural problems in children."

On the day of vaccination, young babies are given doses of aluminium that are the equivalent of up to a thousand times the maximum advised daily safety levels, he says.

HIS VERDICT: You can lessen the amount of aluminium your baby receives by spreading out the vaccines over a period of time.

"Spread out the length of time between the Pediacel (5-in-1), meningitis C and pneumococcal vaccines, all of which contain aluminium, so the amount of aluminium your baby receives on any one day will be reduced."

Of the three meningitis C vaccines available, Miningitec has the least aluminium, says Dr Halvorsen.

Mercury, Autism and the Global Vaccine Agenda

An important video on Mercury in Vaccines and autism

What are vaccines for?

While the FDA questioned thimerosal's safety in the 80s, noting that it was "not safe for 'over-the-counter' topical use because of its potential for cell damage", and while it was removed from animal vaccines for the same reason, the government regulatory committees did nothing to question its use in childhood vaccines.

It's too dangerous for cats and dogs but the government is happy for our babies to be pumped full of the stuff on a regular basis.

Dr Haley has also pointed out that it is also well known by any good biochemist that thimerosal and aluminum react dangerously when combined together. Given that Aluminum is a compound added to many vaccines as a catalyst you would think the government would have heeded this warning, yet it has still done nothing.

Despite the continued reports doubting the link between Thimerosal and autism, more studies have continued to verify the link. As reported in the Capitol Times recently:

A study done at the University of Washington in 2006 showed that baby primates exposed to injected thimerosal (50 percent mercury), at a rate equal to the 1990s childhood vaccine schedule, retained twice as much inorganic mercury in their brains as primates exposed to equal amounts of ingested methylmercury. We know from autometallographic determination that inorganic mercury present in the brain, following the dealkylation of organic mercury, is the toxic agent responsible for changes in the microglial population and leads to neuroinflammation.
In other words thimerosal, inorganic mercury, leads to neuroinflammatory disease which is proven to be the underlying medical condition of autism.


Safe Minds also point out that according to the EPA, one in every six women of childbearing age already has blood levels of mercury high enough to cause neurological damage to their unborn children due to environmental exposures alone.

"Injecting even more mercury into the bodies of pregnant women, infants and children when it is not a necessary component of vaccines is just bad medicine," said Lyn Redwood, president of Safe Minds and parent of a mercury-injured child. "It defies logic that a flu vaccine must be disposed of as a hazardous waste if it is not used, but somehow injecting the same mercury-containing vaccine into a baby is safe."
Yes it defies logic to someone who believes in the unabated progression of the entirety of the human race, however, to an elite devoid of all morality and interested only in the endgame pursuit of their own biological, spiritual and financial monopoly over the whole planet, it makes perfect sense

Research points to leap in autism cases



SARAH HALL
10 July 2007 17:04
The number of Norfolk families seeking help for autism has almost doubled in the past year.

Asperger East Anglia claims more people are seeking treatment and advice for autism, or an autism spectrum disorder such as Asperger's syndrome, than ever before.

The news comes as reports suggested new research by Cambridge University's Autism Research Centre (ARC) found as many as one in 58 children may suffer from the condition, which affects speech, understanding and communication. The figure was previously thought to be one in 100.