Whose Blog Is This?
Log onto Squarespace

Entries in sonograms (1)


Using (Extremely) Out-dated Studies

This post, Ultrasound Proven Unsafe, came out today on the Birth a Miracle Services website. A couple of days ago, I "outed" another website's incorrect information and caused a ruckus in the birth world. While I'm not necessarily looking to do the same thing again, I am not going to stop demonstrating the sometimes dangerous curiosities that find their way to my attention. People have begun sending me links to obviously erroneous "informational" sites and, seriously folks, these really do need to be pointed out.

If natural birth and non-nurse midwifery is ever going to be seen as professional, we have got to stop perpetuating ignorant and incorrect information. 

The above-mentioned post's title alone is so far-fetched wrong as to nearly be laughable. Proven? Seriously?

The article the post is based on is from Midwifery Today, its article entitled, "Ultrasound: Weighing the Propoganda Against the Facts," written in 1999. Nineteen ninety-nine. TWELVE YEARS AGO. 12 years ago is a lifetime in science and medicine. As if that weren't bad enough, the studies that article quotes are from 1979 to 1998. 1979?! Are you kidding me? That was TWENTY YEARS before the article came out! (Sorry, I can't help screaming. It's so absurd, I can hardly control myself.)

The Midwifery Today article is so old as to use the antiquated term "growth retarded babies." When was the last time you heard that ghastly and oh-so-incorrect phrase? It's certainly been many years.

I've seen this exact MT article quoted a dozen or more times over the years, but think it's time people stop using it as if it's some great new ultrasound discovery.

Now, if Birth a Miracle Services was going to write about the MT article and show how even reputable magazines might use out-dated studies to prove their points, that sifting through the mass of misinformation can take time, but that it's worth it to give one's clients the best of the studies out there... if they were going to say these things, highlighting the original article might be acceptable.

But in its current incarnation, I think the blog post, (mis)informational piece, does a great disservice not only for pregnant women looking for information, but also to fellow childbirth educators, doulas and non-nurse midwives. I hope someone feels compelled to correct it.