Comment by verisimi

15 hours ago

But surely it could cause some damage at a lower frequency, power, etc anyway?

Why “surely”?

Most things that are harmless or even necessary at one level are deadly at another: heat, light, water, food, air… pretty much everything really.

“Dosis sola facit venenum” (only the dose makes the poison)

  • Using the example of a laser - you can have a powerful laser that can burn through metal. A far weaker laser (many magnitudes weaker) could still damage eye sight. Alternatively, water erodes mountains eventually.

    I don't think you can argue that ultrasound imaging is harmless or a treatment/dose. It might be that it does nothing. It might also be that it does something (like when it destroys cancer cells) only its far milder, and not an obvious observation.

    PS I know there are mild ultrasound devices to aid muscle recovery. These devices do something, presumably. If mild devices are acknowledged to impact muscles etc, some (mild probably) effect is occuring. Given there are occasions where these devices are known to have an impact, why should we presume that there is no impact on the technology when it is looking at a developing foetus?