Slashdot Mirror
FDA Approves Implantable RFID for Patients
anzha writes "It seems that the FDA has approved an RFID tag for use in patients. The idea being that the rice grain sized chip would be implanted and scanned for patient history and updates. It seems that a similar chip was used by the Mexican government for employees that work with sensitive documents. IDK about you, but this seems a to me little...creepy."
Yes, because if there is one thing the government is good at, it would be respecting peoples privacy and safeguarding personal information.
The fundamental potential for abuse is that since some institution now has a unique ID linked to you, somebody with access to the back-end databases will be able to know as much as the databases recorded.
Since the article doesn't say anything about expiry of said RFID tag, all hospitals and other institutions that want to use this technology will need to share your unique ID number amongst everybody, creating a meta-network of information all tracable to YOU.
Problem is that part of the ideals that this country was founded on included the idea that the government was required to leave you alone unless they suspected you of doing something illegal. Giving the government, or any private organization the ability to monitor you (whether at a hospital or not -- for any reason, any place) with a technology that has an immense potential for misuse is quite a scary idea.
That's why the "If you've nothing to hide, you don't need to worry" line doesn't fly with me -- maybe if we lived in communist Russia, it would be a different story -- this is the US, and my freedom is important to me.
By itself, this seems like it could be a great idea with huge potential, but it's another drop in the bucket, if you ask me...
Yes. And good for him. This kind of technology can prevent people from getting wrong treatments in the hospital because they will not be mis-identified. It may also keep babies from being switched after birth. There are many good uses besides those two. We just need to address privacy issues up front. This is no different, to me, than the availability of printed records that people can access now. These RFID tags only identify you, they do not contain medical records.
http://www.busyweather.com/
For those that think this is a bad thing, don't blame the FDA. The FDA's only job should be to ensure medical safety, that unsafe products don't harm people, not to prevent the abusive use of a product which is not intriniscally bad. It is the use of the product which can be bad. Isn't that the argument you use in stating P2P software should stay legal?
Saying the FDA should ban this technology because it can be abused is like saying they should ban cough syrup because of DXM abuse or that the MPAA should ban Linux DVD software because it can be used by movie pirates, or that the RIAA should be able to ban P2P software because someone could use it to distribute a billion copies of the latest Britney Spears album.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
And putting an RFID tag in the bracelet is the right thing to do. You get all the advantages of the RFID and the patient can remove it when they go home.
No freakin implants required.
Get on a plane - *SCAN*; "Sorry sir, we believe your heart may give out on this flight and we don't want any lawsuits"
While you may not want it, there is always the possibilty that eventually it will be required, so instead of *SCAN*; "Sorry sir, we believe your heart may give out on this flight and we don't want any lawsuits", instead you will get *SCAN*; "Sorry sir, but this airline requires we have access to your VeriChip in the event of a medical emergency"
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing.
Oh, you don't want me to lose my tag when I leave hospital? Why not?
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Read the linked article.
It's a unique ID tag. That's ALL.
The chip won't have ANY data other than "who" you are. And to get any additional data you have to link into the hospital records.
And the police don't have a chance of getting in to those records thanks to privacy laws on medical records.
STOP THE FEARMONGERING.
It's a paper bracelet with your name on it. That's all. You just won't lose this one.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
The debate is going on now and both sides keep talking about all the things we are doing to strengthen homeland security. When will it be time to start questioning whether this makes us more secure? Perhaps doing all this might make us less secure at some point? It's not like 20th century governments have some impeccable record of not abusing their power over their citizens...
Posted anonymously, the chilling effect in action.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What's wrong with one of those temporary tattoos? We've got some fabulous technology with those (take a look at the female olympic vollyball teams...two or three, if you need them), what's keeping us from printing a 1-week barcode on your shoulder, or other good location (ankle, etc).
Would seem to be a better idea than an implant.
1. No more illegal drug trade. Hard to sell drugs if you can't get paid.
2. Ditto for prostitution.
3. No more counterfeiting.
4. No more theft. Remember that IBM commercial a while back with a dude looking like he stole some steaks? The guard comes running out of the store after him and says" sir, you forgot your receipt! "Implying that the implanted chip and merchandise was scanned and debited from his account on the way out.
5. No more black market. Barter is all that would be left.
6. No more income tax evasion.
7. Gov't could track every single person. Hard to commit any crime when they know where and when you are.
This is how they are going to sell this idea. There not gonna come out and say it's the mark of the beast, they're gonna do it as sneaky as possible for "the good of humanity". Only the right wing "nut job" Christians are gonna be freaking out. That's when they take us and cut off our heads. /tinfoil hat.
P.S. The original Greek translation actually says IN the forehead or right hand. The translators couldn't wrap their heads around that one.
Peace.
I'm not anti-social, I'm anti-idiot.
When SSNs first came out, everybody warned about the possibility of abuse for its use as a national number similar to how the nazi's and USSR did
About 20 years ago, it was a huge no-no to use SSNs for doing software, but we did it anyways (actually, I was allowed as I was doing Medical Software in 1985). Then the justice dept cracked down on its use. So everybody switched to Drivers License, but that was considered too much of a national ID.
Now, in the last 3 years, we are required to give SSN's and Drivers Licenses everywhere (bank, jobs, etc). CC companies are now required to give instance access to DOJ whenever they want it. The DOJ has instance access to all tollroads DBs of which cars with tollpass RFIDs are tracking.
The patriot act II (basically passed by both houses and the admin on the day that Sadaam's capture was announced) assures the above and more. (interesting that is was more to DOJ rather than NSA/CIA/NGSA).
And now, the feds want to implant chips in us the same way that I do for my dogs????? Hummmm, Yeah, right.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
No, of course it won't. If I were an evil overlord, here's how I would introduce it...
1) Offer it voluntarily for those that believe it will improve one service or another.
2) Only prisoners convicted of felonies.
3) Drunken drivers who have restricted driving privileges.
4) Schoolchildren, after some kidnapping scare.
5) Babies, after a hospital nursery mixup.
6) Ex-cons on parole, people on probation.
7) Military personel (Will help if your body is burned beyond recognition).
8) People who need to enter restricted buildings. (FBI, CIA agents, congressional staffers, whitehouse personel)
At about this point, I'd start offering expedited rows at the checkout counter, bus terminals, airports, etc. Treat those without the chips as "well, you're completely free to choose, after all it's a free country" and the same way you do people who guard their SSN. Make *them* feel like they're crazy, instead of the system being so.
9) State government personel. State vehicle's ignitions will no longer work without them...
Of course, I may not have the order perfect here, and certainly big business will do its part to help. "I'm sorry sir, but this ATM only works if you have a chipID, so that we can be sure your card wasn't stolen!".
There are some things that are practically inevitable should the become possible. It is now possible, and past one of the few regulatory hurdles that might have obstructed it. Have fun being tagged like livestock, all you sheeple.
Cash will always be around if there is a demand for it. Imagine a culture of Christians unwilling to get the mark. Initially they can trade amongst each other. The most marketable good will become the defacto currency like Vodka in that later days of the soviet union, or american cigarettes in immediate post-war Berlin. There of course will be plenty of marked people who will take a risk and illegally resell their goods with a markup into the non-marked underground economy. As long as the Christians continue to produce things of value to others, they'll be able to survive.