Vox
Gold Member
- Jun 17, 2013
- 10,937
- 867
- 138
If anybody is seriously interested in reading about US - and that is NOT about this case - it is a GENERAL education, as people seem to think the stupid US is the ultimate verdict, which IT IS NOT - in ANY case - here a re the links ( just a few, as I am busy now)
Efficacy of Routine Fetal Ultrasound Screening for Congenital Heart Disease in Normal Pregnancy
Conclusions These results suggest that the current mode of routine prenatal ultrasound screening for congenital malformations is inefficient, particularly for cardiac anomalies
False positives in the prenatal ultrasound screening of fetal structural anomalies - Martinez-Zamora - 2006 - Prenatal Diagnosis - Wiley Online Library
Several prenatally diagnosed anomalies would benefit from prudent counseling, because they may be normal variants or transient findings.
those are just for TWO possible anomalies - cardiac and urological - and they ADD UP - do you really want to be subjected to a totally unreliable diagnosis by an US ONLY?
Would you subject yourself for a potentially letal chemotherapy if the pathology diagnossis of your tissue would say it has a lot of false positives - which means you don't now if you do or do not have the cancer?
It's amazing how people rely on the diagnostics which are not even close to be reliable in a making life-death decision.
Efficacy of Routine Fetal Ultrasound Screening for Congenital Heart Disease in Normal Pregnancy
Conclusions These results suggest that the current mode of routine prenatal ultrasound screening for congenital malformations is inefficient, particularly for cardiac anomalies
False positives in the prenatal ultrasound screening of fetal structural anomalies - Martinez-Zamora - 2006 - Prenatal Diagnosis - Wiley Online Library
Several prenatally diagnosed anomalies would benefit from prudent counseling, because they may be normal variants or transient findings.
those are just for TWO possible anomalies - cardiac and urological - and they ADD UP - do you really want to be subjected to a totally unreliable diagnosis by an US ONLY?
Would you subject yourself for a potentially letal chemotherapy if the pathology diagnossis of your tissue would say it has a lot of false positives - which means you don't now if you do or do not have the cancer?
It's amazing how people rely on the diagnostics which are not even close to be reliable in a making life-death decision.