The fMRI brain scan has long been a staple of neuroscience research. When we examine the history of MRI scans, we see a history of overconfidence, and authorities dogmatically asserting that "MRI scans are perfectly safe," when they did not actually know whether they were perfectly safe. The 2009 study here ("Genotoxic effects of 3 T magnetic resonance imaging in cultured human lymphocytes") cautions about the use of a high-intensity("3T and above") MRI, and states that "potential health risks are implied in the MRI and especially HF MRI environment due to high-static magnetic fields, fast gradient magnetic fields, and strong radiofrequency electromagnetic fields," also noting that "these results suggest that exposure to 3 T MRI induces genotoxic effects in human lymphocytes," referring to effects that may cause cancer.
More than ten years ago there arose the great "contrast agent" scandal. Scientists began to learn that what are called "contrast agent" MRI scans (given to 30 million people annually) may not be so safe. In such "contrast agent" scans, a subject is given an injection that increases the visual contrast of the MRI scan. For a long time, the main substance in such an injection was gadolinium. A mainstream cancer web site states, "Tissue and autopsy reports have also confirmed that gadolinium can accumulate in the brain and other organs." The results can be a health disaster, as described here. A 2019 Science Daily story says, "New contrast agent could make MRIs safer," letting us know that many of them previously were not so safe. On the same Science Daily web site, we read a 2017 news story with the title "MRI contrast agents accumulate in the brain." A 2020 paper ("Side Effect of Gadolinium MRI Contrast Agents") says this:
"Until recently, it was believed that gadolinium is effectively cleared within 24 hours after intravenous injection, and that it does not have any harmful effects on the human body. However, recent studies on animals and analyses of clinical data have indicated that gadolinium is retained in the body for many years post-administration, and may cause various diseases."
Neuroscientists have extensively used such contrast agents (as described here), very often putting human subjects at risk for the sake of junk poorly-designed studies falling very far short of the best experimental practices. All the while, many of our experts were making the untrue claim that "MRI scans are perfectly safe," a statement which was not clearly true for the large fraction of MRI studies that used gadolinium contrast agents. You can do a Google search for "gadolinium deposition" to learn more about this issue.
An October 2024 article published by the US Department of Veteran Affairs is entitled "Metal in MRI contrast agents may cause serious health problems." We learn some shocking details suggesting neuroscience researchers may have been massively endangering their research volunteers:
"New Mexico VA Healthcare System researchers were part of a team of experts who revealed potential chronic health problems linked to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agents.
Their review article compiled evidence that the metal gadolinium can remain in the body and lead to multiple conditions, such as kidney injury, debilitating joint and skin problems, and even fatal brain damage....A peculiar, devastating condition, systemic fibrosis, was first identified in 1997 in end-stage renal disease patients. Patients were afflicted with severe pain and a woody or cobblestone-like texture to the skin, as well as joint problems. Nephrologists identified gadolinium as the most significant risk factor in 2006. ...
Now it seems the gadolinium contrast agents have the potential for harm in other patients, not just those with impaired kidney function, based on evidence gathered by Wagner and his team. They said their findings have profound implications for patients experiencing symptoms associated with gadolinium exposure, such as brain fog, skin disorders, joint pain, and permanent disability.
The researchers also discovered gadolinium can stay in the body for a long time, possibly permanently, meaning patients may experience symptoms immediately after as little as one MRI contrast agent exposure or many years after exposure."
The article is discussing the 2024 paper "The safety of magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents," which you can read here. Below are some excerpts:
"Safety concerns with magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents arose when gadolinium was linked to the blight systemic fibrosis, a grievous infirmity (Grobner, 2006)... In addition to severe pain, the skin has been characterized as having a woody induration and cobblestoned. The disease is also associated with severely debilitating joint contractures....Gadolinium-based contrast agents are increasingly associated with cutaneous and systemic abnormalities in patients with normal renal function...Data mining of the United States Food & Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System corroborates that skin complications relate to most brands of magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents (Wang et al., 2023). As of 30 September 2023, 31,868 reactions were reported to the United States Food & Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (Figure 2). The leading reaction group for all magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents is skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (including nephrogenic systemic fibrosis)....Symptoms were skin thickening, 'like hard rubber,' hair loss, skin biopsy with fibrosis, and abnormal calcification on mammograms and x-rays....Acute kidney injury has also been temporally linked to gadolinium-based contrast administration....Neurotoxicity has been linked to magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents in rodent models and case reports (Rogosnitzky and Branch, 2016)....Known complications of gadolinium-based contrast agent administration include kidney damage (Leander et al., 1992; Prince et al., 1996; Sam et al., 2003; Thomsen, 2004; Akgun et al., 2006; Briguori et al., 2006; Ergun et al., 2006; Elmstahl et al., 2007), nephrogenic systemic fibrosis, skin disorders, and sometimes permanent neurologic sequelae (including coma and death). Each dose of gadolinium is fraught with unanticipated risks...In humans, a single magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent exposure can trigger nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (Broome et al., 2007; Thomsen et al., 2007; Abraham et al., 2008; Shabana et al., 2008; Leyba and Wagner, 2019). When Dr. Sean Cowper (Professor of Dermatology, Yale School of Medicine) maintained a registry of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis cases, he noted that 46% of cases had just a single exposure....There are many reports of neurotoxicity induced by gadolinium (Table 2). Many case reports detail acute, subacute, and chronic complications (summarized in Supplementary Material). Invariably, these cases required escalation of care for life-threatening scenarios....The doses of magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent needed to induce severe neurologic manifestations (and sometimes death) are minute. .Disinherited by the medical establishment, patients spend an eternal time in chronic symptomatic purgatory....Magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents cause kidney injury and gadolinium encephalopathy (sometimes fatal) and may lead to permanent gadolinium retention. Provider education regarding these known adverse events is critical, and informing patients of these risks and outcomes is essential."
The University of North Carolina publishes a template for an "Adult Consent Form," an informed consent form for research studies. The template has the selection below. I will boldface and underline two lines:
"As part of the MRl procedure you may receive a dye called gadolinium. Gadolinium makes it easier to see details on the MRI pictures. If you have any problems with your kidneys, you may be at risk for a condition called Nephrogenic Systemic Fibrosis or Nephrogenic Fibrosing Dermopathy (NSF). NSF has been reported to occur between 2 days and 18 months following injection of gadolinium. There is no known treatment for NSF. Some people have even died from this. Signs and symptoms of NSF may include: burning, swelling, hardening or tightening of the skin, blood vessels and internal organs (heart, lungs, live; yellow spots on the white part of the eyes; joint swelling and stiffness; pain in the hip bones or ribs; muscle weakness."
This is a template for an "informed consent" form that will notify neuroscience research volunteers about hazards of being injected with gadolinium. But it does not properly notify volunteers of the risks of being injected with gadolinium. An "informed consent" form made from this template will give research volunteers the incorrect idea that they will have risk from the gadolinium only if they have kidney problems. But research has long shown that gadolinium has serious risks for people without kidney problems (i.e. with normal renal function), as discussed above. The same University of North Carolina "informed consent" template fails to mention that research has found genotoxic effects from fMRI exposure, with chromosome damage proportional to the number of fMRI scans. The 2022 paper "The effects of repeated brain MRI on chromosomal damage" found that "The total number of damaged cells increased by 3.2% (95% CI 1.5–4.8%) per MRI." The paper was referring to "DNA breaks" that have a possibility of increasing cancer risk.
Another example of an appalling template for an informed consent document is the McGill University document that you can reach here. The document has no mention of MRI risks. In the part of the document that should discuss such risks, we read only this:
"During this study, you will be exposed to a strong magnetic field.
No long-term negative side effects have been observed from this type of study. As mentioned above, the MR is very noisy and you will be given earplugs to reduce this effect."
We have an appalling example of carelessness. The passage doesn't even spell MRI correctly, spelling it as MR. It is a fact that people are sometimes injured by MRI machines that can turn metal objects into high-speed projectiles. A young boy was once killed by an MRI machine when that happened. Carcinogenic effects have been studied from exposure to MRI machines, as quoted above. The claim that "no long-term negative side effects have been observed from this type of study" is false. Above I make a long quote of devastating side effects from fMRI studies using gadolinium contrast agents. Neuroscience experiments often expose subjects to long and repeated fMRI brain scans, with total fMRI exposure much longer than they would get from a normal MRI checking for body injury or cancer. Some examples of this can be found in my series of posts here, such as subjects who each underwent 16 hours of medically unnecessary brain scanning.
A scientific study made a survey of "informed consent" documents used in neuroscience research, and found massive misrepresentation. We read this:
"In 30% of the files, the consent forms and protocols made no mention of any
potential unknown harms of MRI. Of the consent forms and protocols that did
discuss potential unknown harms, 46% contained statements such as, 'no
long-term adverse health effects of MRI have been reported' or 'no long term
harm to patients has been found from exposure to the magnetic field.' Nineteen
percent of the consent forms and protocols had statements along the lines
that, 'there are no known side-effects or complications that have occurred during
or following MRI examinations.' ”
The same study states this:
"Statements that 'no long term harms of MRI have been reported' or 'no long term harm to patients has been found from exposure to the magnetic field' are inaccurate.... Not enough useful epidemiological evidence has been gathered to support an unequivocal statement that there is insignificant risk associated with the static magnetic fields of MRI. Until there is sufficient scientific evidence about long-term harms of MRI (at all strengths and for all
populations) or clear standards developed for unknown harms, researchers cannot make a blanket claim that there is insignificant risk associated with the static magnetic fields of MRI."
Eager to get as many human volunteers as possible for neuroscience research (mostly low-income volunteers lured in by "chump change" payments such as 20 dollars an hour), our neuroscience researchers are not properly informing subjects of the risks they are undergoing. This is a moral disgrace. Most or a large fraction of the people who are being put at risk (without being properly informed of the risks they are taking) are people put at risk for the sake of poorly designed neuroscience studies typically guilty of Questionable Research Practices such as lack of a blinding protocol, lack of pre-registration and way-too-small study group sizes. What's going on is like what is imagined in the visual below.
No comments:
Post a Comment