Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : IMDS nasdaq bulletin board -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gao seng who wrote (3465)	6/10/1999 11:15:00 AM
From: Andrew Abraham	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4122

When I worked for the March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation back in the early 1980s, we had to deal with similar such reports questioning the safety of ultrasound. There was even an advocacy group composed of mothers who claimed their children's birth defects had been caused by ultrasound (as opposed to the cigarettes they smoked or the alcohol they drank during pregnancy or another cause). Now, after almost 20 years of many large scale clinical and epidemiologic studies, the safety of ultrasound has been well established. Anyone with even a smattering of knowledge about teratology (the study of birth defects) knows that scientists can induce birth defects in mice with many substances that are harmless to humans. Even salt and sugar have been reported to cause birth defects by some lame-brained studies. Mice and rats are next to worthless models for identifying agents that cause birth defects in humans. Not surprisingly, thalidomide -- the most well-known and dreaded birth defect inducing substance -- does not cause birth defects in mice and rats.