Saturday, November 26, 2005

On Tom, Katie and Prudence

Medical ultrasound has long been known to be both safe and effective in diagnosing many different kinds of diseases. To date, there are no known side effects of ultrasound imaging. However, with the new breed of equipment that are manufactured today, which produces more ultrasound power and which noticeably generates more heat, there are concerns that there may be side effects that may be discovered only in the future. Thus prudent use of the technology is advised by many international medical societies concerned with ultrasound.

The safety group of the British Medical Ultrasound Society (BMUS), one of the well known societies that studies ultrasound instrumentation, has an official statement on the safety of ultrasound, which recommends prudence on use of the technology:
There is no evidence that diagnostic ultrasound has produced any harm to patients in the four decades that it has been in use. However, the acoustic output of modern equipment is generally much greater than that of the early equipment and, in view of the continuing progress in equipment design and applications, outputs may be expected to continue to be subject to change. Also, investigations into the possibility of subtle or transient effects are still at an early stage. Consequently diagnostic ultrasound can olyn be considered safe if used prudently.
Meanwhile, the American Institure of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM) also espoused prudence on the use of the ultrasound in their statement:
There are no confirmed biological effects on patients or instrument operators caused by exposures from present diagnostic ultrasound equipment. Although the possibility exists that such biological effects may be identified in the future, current data indicate that the benefits to patients of the prudent use of diagnostic ultrasound outweight the risks, if any, that may be present.
Which means that ultrasound is indeed safe, or at least that is what we know so far...

But what does that has got to do with Tom Cruise?

Well, just today, I read from the news (yahoo movie news) that Mr. Cruise bought his own ultrasound (the news clip used the word sonogram) machine to be able to see his own baby inside the tummy of his fiance Ms. Katie Holmes!
Not every family can afford one at a price tab of up to $200,000 but actor Tom Cruise says he bought a sonogram machine for his pregnant fiance Katie Holmes so that they can monitor the development of their child.
The news clip didn't say though what kind of ultrasound machine Mr. Cruise bought and perhaps the same is mistaken to say that the system will cost between $150,000 to $200,000 (An ultrasound to be used only to see the baby will not cost that much, even if it the most expensive model and with 3D/4D feature). It would be interesting to know what brand he purchased (most probably an US brand).

But what is Mr. Cruise planning to do with his machine? Would he be looking at his baby every now and then that he needed to have his own equipment? If that is the case, Mr. Cruise is yet to meet Ms. Prudence.

I just hope that Tom Cruise would read the BMUS' and AIUM's statements first before he uses his ultrasound like an ordinary camera. I also hope that everything'll turn out well especially for the baby.

No comments: