On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 12:46:04PM +1300, RussellMc wrote:
> A look at the two abstracts and references indicated that the
> question of foetal ultrasound safety is not a settled one in the
> medical profession.  Conclusion (2) below bears noting :-(.

Perhaps the science is there, but like the future is not yet well
distributed.

In my country, most diagnostic ultrasound services are pay per event,
so there is a clear conflict of interest to be managed.

Speculating is so enjoyable: natural sources of ultrasound are bats,
dolphins, and moving glaciers.  In the presence of these would a
foetus respond differently to "normal", perhaps initiating an
obesogenic or diabetic response, to better fit the environment?

Try getting ethics approval for that kind of study.  ;-}

We're a bit off the MEMS topic.  In a vain attempt to bring us back
.... humans have something like MEMS, but I've not seen any
relationship between ultrasonic tartar removal and balance or hearing
loss.

--=20
James Cameron
http://quozl.linux.org.au/
--=20
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.