how many scans are safe???

[GILLI79]

10+3 weeks pregnant have had 2 ultrasounds so far, one at 7 weeks and one at 10 weeks. my next one is at fourteen weeks. i really wanted to tell people about being pregnant at 12 weeks do you think having another scan in between would be too many??, or just try and get a doppler instead think i just need reassurance as previous miscarriage.

I don't think a doppler would be reassuring. They can be pretty tricky to use and might worry you more.

If you are really that worried, wouldn't you juts be worried 30 minutes after the scan anyway?

How would you get another scan? EPU or something, or would it be private?

Doppler particularly tricky to use so early on, I meant to say.

ER....the doppler you buy to listen to the heart beat IS an ultrasound scanner! It's much weaker than the ones the hospital use for ultrasound though.

I've had several m/c so I know where you are coming from, but and ultrasound is only going to tell you the baby is ok at that time - it's tough though, I know.

I've had scans at 7,8 and 10 weeks with this one, and have another on tues (at 12+6), and if all is well, I will have another 2 weeks later. My age and other factors make me high risk. I am not at all concerned at having so many scans.

There's no real evidence that multiple scans cause any problems. Some studies have shown that very frequently scanned babies have higher rates of left-handedness. Being left handed is often the result of subtle forms of brain damage (or rather, damage to the brain, which the brain overcomes by becoming left handed). It is thought that the ultrasounds are not causing this....but that the problems that led to the high number of scans causes it....... and that the scanning it's self is safe.

There are more questions over the new 3d/4d scans - probably safe too, but they are much stronger and more intense than "normal" scans.

oldmum42 - do you know of any recent research into the longer term effects of US? I'd be really interested to read it as I've tried to find more information a number of times over the last few years and failed to find much written in the last decade. Any pointers gratefully received

I've not bookmarked anything, so hard to say what I was reading - I think all the left-handed stuff was a few years old and although there are some scary articles out there about ultrasound heating the fetal tissue and possibly causing damage, if you then try to trace back to the original scientific paper, usually they say "theoretical risk", and have other explanations (such as, the baby was already damaged, that's why it was getting scanned.

There do seem to be more questionmarks over the new 3/4d scans, as they are stronger and take longer to do but there is no proof of damage.

The internet is a great thing, but it's always important to check the story back to the source article/scientific paper - you'd be surprised how often the stories carried in our so called quality newspapers are absolute bollocks when you go and read the original research papers!! Obviously I have too much time on my hands, but I enjoy a bit of detective work.

Oh I completely agree - I do think the press have a responsibility that they forget all to often.

I also enjoy a good data hunt when I get the chance . Its an area I found incredibly hard to get good data on as, from what I could see, there was very little research done at all and much of it was pretty old. I agree that there's no proof of damage - I'd have been much more reassured if I could have found proof of no damage...

When i had DS, I had scans at 12 weeks, 16, 20, 24, 28, 30, 32, 34,35,36,37,38,39 and 40 weeks. No apparent damage to ds, and no problems in pregnancy as a result.I wouldn't worry too much - they only offer scans if they're aboslutely necessary, but if you are concerned, maybe speak to the obstetrician for reassurance. Sorry to hear about your m/c.

Tangle - I take it from your "no proof of damage/proof of no damage" that you're probable a science graduate like me (or you should have been!)

My favorite Bollocks press story recently was the 2 page tabloid spread on how to concieve by eating healthy/being the right weight (about a year ago when I was TTC), which quoted a new study as saying that you should keep your weight down to below a BMI of 25 in order to concieve and being over weight reduced your chances by a huge amount. On actually reading the research paper, I found that it said a BMI of 27-30 (overweigh but not obese) was the most fertile, while fertiliy reduced the thinner you were, but also if you were obese.
I ofetn find reports are distorted in the press so that they follow current political dogma - and are half truths at best

OP - Yesterday I had the 4th scan of this pregnancy (several mc so I'm being watched very carefully), while I had CVS, all looked well, just awaiting the results now and then we will tell everyone, IKWYM about wanting to tell everyone at 12 weeks, but maybe wanting to hold back a bit because of previous disapointments - it's tough I know.
I'm 13+3 and it's aleady getting a bit hard breath in my bump when I see someone I know!
You saw the baby at 10 weeks, and if it was going ok at 10 weeks, statistically there's only a small chance of something going wrong now - they must have been quite happy with it if they didn't want to check again for 4 weeks. Fingers crossed.

oldmum42 - got me!

The press story that's got me riled recently is the "women should have a waist of

Tangle,

I think most health advice is based on the theory that everyone is too stupid to cope with anything other than a single easy to follow message!

Oh yes I love all the anti-fat, you're-all-going-to-die stories (c.o.i. I'm not exactly thin), but you see very little written about the fact that it's NOT fat that's the real problem, it't inactivity (risk of diabetes, heart disease etc drop like a stone if you are fat and take up regular exersise). I swim half a mile every school day (after I drop ds1,2 +3 at school) so feel I'm at less risk than most Bmi 25 totally inactive people my age.

Ikwym, r.e. emotional versus rational, but still good to know everything you can about whatever you are going through - knowlege is power and all that - though I've have a couple of mw say to me "you know too much", usually when I've known more than them about some obscure thing, but I've just laughed and said "maybe it's that other people know too little!"