Local.de reports on the first MRI scan of a baby being born, apparently completed by Berlin’s Charité Hospital. The image shows a clear saggital section of the baby’s brain as it is being delivered.
The article reports:
A team comprised of obstetricians, radiologists and engineers have built an “open” MRI scanner that allows a mother-to-be to fit fully into the machine and give birth there, the hospital announced on Tuesday.
The MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) scanner has already taken unique images of the body of a mother and the movement of her baby through the birth canal to the point where its head emerges into the world. The birth that took place in the scanner went smoothly and both mother and baby were in good health, a hospital spokeswoman said.
All I can say is – wow!
Mind Hacks 
This is an excellent followup study to this IgNobel prize-winning (in Medicine, in 2000) paper:
“Magnetic resonance imaging of male and female genitals during coitus and female sexual arousal.”
[link]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10600954[/link]
[link]http://improbable.com/ig/winners/#ig2000[/link]
All I can say is – I’m sorry for the mother and the baby.
Fit mother into the machine???
Except for hanging upside down by her ankles, the supine position (flat on one’s back) is the worst possible for delivering a baby – that is worst possible for the mother, most convenient for the doctor. The mother should be moving, standing, squatting, being on all four, semi-sitting, whatever but lying flat and still.
I get the idea “in the name of science”, but I would never sacrifice the birth of my own child (and yes, I have already given birth) to this.
Just 2 cents from a mother who cannot imagine being in a machine for delivery…
Unless they changed the orientation of the image afterwards, Mom is not in the supine position.
i dont think you know what an open mri is.
Looks like Neuroskeptic in there!
Fabulous picture, but it’s upside down. The spine should be at the bottom of the frame (properly positioned babies are born facing backwards.)
Well observed, HeidiKM. Just as a matter of interest I inverted the image and found that, although it made more sense anatomically, the image of the baby was much harder to ‘read’.
where’s the video?