Body 2.0 — Continuous Monitoring of the Human Body

Singularity Hub has a story about the development of technology that will some day allow for the constant, real-time monitoring of your medical status, and they take a look at current technological advances to that end. Quoting: "Did you ever stop to think how silly and also how dangerous it is to live our lives with absolutely no monitoring of our body's medical status? Years from now people will look back and find it unbelievable that heart attacks, strokes, hormone imbalances, sugar levels, and hundreds of other bodily vital signs and malfunctions were not being continuously anticipated and monitored by medical implants. ... The huge amounts of data that would be accumulated from hundreds of thousands of continuously monitored people would be nothing short of a revolution for medical research and analysis. This data could be harvested to understand the minute by minute changes in body chemistry that occur in response to medication, stress, infection, and so on. As an example, the daily fluctuations in hormone levels of hundreds of thousands of individuals could be tracked and charted 24/7 to determine a baseline from which abnormalities and patterns could be extracted. The possibilities are enormous."

Comments

No

[seanadams.com]

Did you ever stop to think how silly and also how dangerous it is to live our lives with absolutely no monitoring of our body's medical status?

I think it's silly how people constantly try to eliminate every imaginable element of risk from their lives instead of just getting out there and living it. I find the idea of having my physiology constantly monitored by a computer about as attractive as living in a big plastic bubble. But hey if what you want out of modern medicine is to be protected by layer after layer of prophylactics so you can feel safe, by all means go for it.

Re:No

[kraemate]

Yes why dont we all stop using hospitals as well.
If its your day to die its your day to die.
Asking for some-one's help to save your life is for sissies.

I can monitor my laptop's fan speed all day long, but cant do so for my heart, which is /much/ more important than a replaceable gadget.

Re:No

[Jurily]

I find the idea of having my physiology constantly monitored by a computer about as attractive as living in a big plastic bubble.

I have an immune system designed for just that purpose. Oh, and it actually does something when it finds something.

Re:No

[commodore64_love]

>>>a threat to public health and forceful measures to protect US from YOU

Japan already has mandatory diets for those with BMI>30. When the government gives you taxpayer-supported healthcare, the government also has the right to run your life. Just the same as when Congress hands money to the States, and attaches all kinds of requirements, such as raising the drinking age from 18 to 21.

Of course the States have the option to refuse Congressional money, and leave the drinking age at 18. Unfortunately the citizens do not have a similar right - citizens are expected to fall into line according to the Tyrants... er, politicians' wishes. "Go on a diet!" "Yes sir."

Re:No

[seanadams.com]

I can imagine a future society where your attitude would be considered a threat to public health and forceful measures to protect US from YOU.

Gosh yes, imagine a world where it's illegal to ride a bike unless you are wearing a proper helmet approved by a government designated regulatory agency, or to drive your car without wearing your seatbelt, or to smoke a cigarette or a joint in the privacy of your own home. Or where you're required by the state to buy overpriced insurance whether you want it or not. Where the state disciplines you for disciplining your kid, where restaurants are forbidden from serving certain tasty yet unhealthy ingredients, where every product and every place of business is clearly labeled concerning the possible risks of cancer. Oh, heaven forfend that this might spiral into such lunacy!

Re:No

[Linker3000]

"You are experiencing a heart attack. I have checked your bank balance and credit card limits and you have insufficient funds for full, practical treatment. Do you want me to SMS a) Your wife, or b) Your mother. Watching the following funeral services commercial presentations may entitle you to a 10% discount. Here's some soothing music while you decide and I update your Myspace status and send a Tweet."

Re:No

[kraemate]

Its not just about real-time monitoring but also collecting data.
Knowing the complete medical history will enable far diagnosis.
Everybody is different and this data will stop doctors from generalizations and treat patients based on their past data and actual deviations from /your/ average.

Re:No

[Ihlosi]

Yeah, but DOES IT RUN LINUX?

With implanted medical monitors, LINUX RUNS YOU!

Re:No

[clarkkent09]

You can't "take charge of your health". Sure, living a healthy lifestyle reduces the risks of many health problems but there are plenty where your genes count far more than your lifestyle. In many of the most serious diseases (such as many cancers and heart problems) family history is the primary factor. Of course accidents can happen too.

Re:No

[Bobb9000]

I'm glad someone in this thread isn't being ridiculous. I would love to be able to have a constant readout of my body's status. While you can determine some things using your own senses, there's nothing like a computer for precisely doing dull, repetitive tasks, like checking your pulse or taking your blood pressure.

While there are obvious privacy issues here, new technology doesn't have to always produce net evil results. I would have thought people on a tech board would understand that. If devices like this were built to only report results using a method that's sure to be noticed, and stupid governments don't pass laws mandating the results be given to the government, this would be an incredible tool not only for medical diagnosis, but also for learning to better control your body.

And before anyone starts yapping about how governments are always stupid and will always take your freedom, so we'd be better off not having this tech, I just have to say: grow up. Governments are masses of people, not monolithic freedom vampires, and if you seriously think that you can have no impact on the course of government, you don't deserve the freedoms a lot of people have worked hard and sacrificed for over the years. If you don't like the current state of government (and there's plenty not to like), then get genuinely politically active, instead of just anonymously whining on the internet.

Sorry, /rant.

Re:No

[clarkkent09]

Still, continuous monitoring of your heart rate is far more useful. You could have a serious heart condition and your pulse will still look normal in most random tests. When it starts to show abnormalities is when you want to be alerted and that's what an implant would do.

Re:No

[__aaclcg7560]

According to my family history, if you drink and/or smoke, you die young from liver and cancer disease. If you live a healthy lifestyle, you die of "natural causes" in your early 90s. Taking responsibility for my own health was the best decision in my young life.

Re:No

[Skal Tura]

ROFLMAO! X)

Utopistic

But that shows one important question: Why do we keep paying immensively high taxes (atleast here in Finland), yet are unable to get something as important as proper medical care?

Here, high taxes is often defended with medical care, yet it's totally crap, if you get doctor's appointment, they have less than 5minutes for you, and basicly rolls a dice to make a diagnosis, and gives you random medication.

Or more recent incident was that i were getting wisdom tooth removed, i got the appointment in several hours as emergency (the tooth cracked) and the operation was fast and painless, they pumped me so full of dope!

However: They did not warn me not to drive my car, NOR did warn about the immense pain i would be suffering from a few hours late. Thank god my friend happened to have red triangle painmeds, but even with them the pain got so hard through that my knees went soft everytime it struck through an very high dose of that red triangle pain med.

No warning, no prescriptions or anything, that really sucked ... 2 days of agony even with those meds, which were so powerfull that almost everytime after taking one i fell asleep.

Re:No

[pthreadunixman]

I hate it when people quote Heisenberg out of context.

Re:No

[Jurily]

Microsoft Vaccine 2000 is configuring your immune system. This may take a few minutes. If your body stops responding for a long time and there is no brain activity please die. Setup will continue after you are reborn.

Re:No

[w0mprat]

When the government gives you taxpayer-supported healthcare, the government also has the right to run your life

Not true. I live in a country with publicly funded healthcare. It seems statements such as yours are FUD and rhetoric from the private healthcare industry since it clearly not how things actually work out. Clearly totally private healthcare as implemented in the USA does not work. The advantage of of public healthcare is everybody has access to it, and are get care based on need, not on wealth class or race, which is what inevitably happens with an private insurance based system.

So presumably, you trust big corporates more than a government?

Don't get me wrong though, public healtcare has problems, especially in terms of limited resources in the UK, various EU members, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc. But somehow these nations rank much higher in health standards that the USA.

For-profit health care is beholden to a financial bottom line, not a democratic government mandated to measure performance on care, not revenue. So in private vs public the latter is the lesser of two evils.

Re:No

[pthreadunixman]

Heisenberg was specifically talking about being unable measure position and momentum precisely at the same time at the quantum level. For some reason, it has been turned into some meta-physical philosophical concept that I find annoying. Yes. We can measure body temperature without causing people to spontaneously catch on fire. Yes. We can measure the temperature of the Earth without it causing it to explode. No. We can't measure the spin of an electron and know it's exact position at the same time.

Re:No

[caluml]

But that's the sort of misidentification than implanted RFID tags, and tattooed numbers on the skin will prevent? Can't you see the benefits?

Re:No

[Money for Nothin']

You believe you have an impact on government? Then you're numerically- and politically-naive, at best (so, I will guess you are a college student).

Voting is individually-irrational -- even if it is collectively the least-bad political option yet-devised (it beats dictatorship in its ability to deliver human freedom and modern societal outcomes).

Take a hypothetical voting population of 100 people - you are 1 of that 100. Assume 51% voter turnout.

Of the 51 people voting, assume 26 voted Republican, 24 voted Democrat, and your vote is not yet cast. What is your vote?

Answer: it doesn't matter. If you vote Democrat, you still lose: 26 (R) votes out-numbers 25 (D) votes -- Republicans win. And if you vote Republican (27 vs 24), the Republicans still win, but by a larger margin.

So, the election outcome is identical -- regardless of how, or even *whether*, you voted.

The logic is the same with any democratic election, only with much bigger numbers.

Thus, the only scenario in which your individual vote makes *any* difference is the practically-impossible tie-breaker case: e.g. voting population = 50, 25 vote (R), 24 vote (D), and you choose to vote (D) results in a tie, rather than a Democratic loss. (And we know from the 2000 how this case turns-out in U.S. Presidential elections, in practice: 9 unelected judges in the U.S. Supreme Court decide who becomes President, instead of you or the rest of the nation.)

As the saying goes, "democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner." Democracy, in short, is mobocracy. Government *does* seek to abolish freedom, under any political party's guidance (Republican, Democrat, even Libertarian); it is always a question of "freedom for (and from) whom, and freedom in what form?"

Personally, I'm ambivalent about this continuous monitoring. It has great potential for bettering human health, but also great potential for abuse, not only by government, but criminals and businesses too...

Re:No

[yndrd1984]

Clearly totally private healthcare as implemented in the USA does not work.

Just to be clear, we don't have totally private healthcare here. The government covers about 40% of us, most of the rest get coverage through work, and only a small fraction actually buy health insurance on its own. This allows us to enjoy healthcare as unequally distributed as a full-blown free market system, as bureaucratic and unresponsive as any large government system, and as expensive as both put together.

Re:No

[fractoid]

I hate it when people quote Heisenberg out of context.

He might, or might not, have quoted Heisenberg out of context. Until I look it up, though, his post exists in a state of superposition, doesn't it? :)

Re:No

[speedtux]

Japan already has mandatory diets for those with BMI>30. When the government gives you taxpayer-supported healthcare, the government also has the right to run your life.

Well, I can't find anything corroborating those claims. But assuming they are true, most likely, there aren't "mandatory diets" but simply either/or choices: either you go on a diet or you lose your government health care. And that's something I'd fully support: if you refuse reasonable treatments, then your health insurance shouldn't be required to pay for your further treatments. It's just like your car insurance isn't required to pay if you deliberately crash your car.

Re:No

[achurch]

Japan already has mandatory diets for those with BMI>30.

Not quite true. The relevant law mandates metabolic syndrome checks for people aged 40-74, and it catches people with (1) waist size >= 85cm (90cm for women) or BMI >= 25 and (2) high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or high blood sugar. Supposedly there's a financial penalty for not taking the exam, or for not following the directions (diet, etc.) you're given, but I haven't been able to find any specific mention of such.

Re:No

[An Onerous Coward]

"Spanking" only describes the location of the blows. That is to say, you can't spank a child's face, but you can spank the butt until it bleeds. It doesn't adequately describe force, duration, what implements were used.

Therefore, to me, "spanking" should not be legal or illegal. But leaving bruises, or welts that last more than, say, an hour, probably should be.

And the fine print....

[SIR_Taco]

"This new technology is sponsored and funded by:
Your friendly health and life insurance company, constantly finding new and innovative ways to make sure we never have to pay you a dime since 1666."

We've got along well enough without

[thetoadwarrior]

I'm not sure the constant worry about the fluctuating read-out would help people.

Besides that's one more system to be abused and used as an excuse to exclude you from something.

Re:We've got along well enough without

[DigiShaman]

Why not?

Our servers and networks have continuous monitoring. Sure, sometimes you get some strange read-outs and "spikes" in the data but overall you can track trends and be on the lookout for pending disasters.

So while we got along well enough without continuous monitoring, imagine how much better we could be with it.

Re:We've got along well enough without

[Dhalka226]

The difference is that in most cases, the person keeping an eye on all those server and network monitors is actually trained. At the very least, they have enough technical knowledge about the subjects in hand that they can make an educated decision as to whether it's worth waking the grumpy sysadmin to come down to the office or whether the problem can wait until morning.

This is more likely to be read by a bunch of amateurs concerned by any fluctuation in any reading, and then running to their "sysadmin" twice a week to see what's wrong when the answer is that nothing is wrong; sometimes things just fluctuate. Not only is that going to annoy, distract and potentially overwhelm doctors, but it's going to flood their offices with pointless appointments and have a much greater chance of squeezing out somebody who legitimately needs to be there.

It kind of reminds me of Dr. House from the tv show: He hates full body scans, because he says you'll always find a half dozen unrelated things wrong with the patient that now you have to treat and you're likely no closer to figuring out what their actual problem was. All other concerns aside, this is very likely going to be the same thing.

I've wondered that

[jmnugent]

..for a pretty long time actually. I dont want it because I'm some kind of hypochondriac, I just think it would be cool to be able to monitor my daily rhythms. After a while you'd get an idea of what a baseline reading for any normal day was,.. and knowing that information would make you better informed about how your eating/drinking/drug use/whatever affects your body. Better yet,.. when you go to see the doctor, he can look back through your prior week or two of diagnostics and it might help him figure out whats wrong. Imagine trying to troubleshoot a computer where you had no Log files or any historical data. Possible? yes. Faster and better fixes when you have historical data?.. absolutely. (and it could help you catch something small before it becomes a bigger problem)

Our body has a monitoring system built in

[hwyhobo]

Did you ever stop to think how silly and also how dangerous it is to live our lives with absolutely no monitoring of our body's medical status?

Actually, our bodies provide lots of feedback. It's just that we are never taught how to listen to those signals. It's usually after the injury occurs that we learn to listen on our own. You would be amazed how well many diabetics can tell their sugar level at any given moment. It doesn't take more than a month of measuring to learn that. I know I may sound heretical on a geek board, but I would consider that skill more vital to many people than calculus.

Re:Our body has a monitoring system built in

[khallow]

The problem is that our bodies don't provide that feedback to anyone else. And people infamously either pay too little or too much attention to those signals.

Re:Our body has a monitoring system built in

[Eil]

I know I may sound heretical on a geek board, but I would consider that skill more vital to many people than calculus.

Fun game:

Ask your friends what the current stats are on their WoW character. Strength, agility, stamina, intelligence, etc.

Then ask them what their resting heart rate is. (Them, not the character.)

Re:Our body has a monitoring system built in

[slash.dt]

You would be amazed how well many diabetics can tell their sugar level at any given moment. It doesn't take more than a month of measuring to learn that.

And you would also be amazed at how often people whose life depends on knowing their glucose levels get it wrong. I'm pretty good at estimating mine on the low (immediate danger) side, but not so good as estimating when my blood glucose is high (long term danger)side.

I'm surprised that the article doesn't mention continous blood glucose monitors which are already readily available - ok, you only implant them for 3-7 days at a time but that will get better. So instead of all the vapourware being mentioned in the article they could have talked about a product which is already here.

Can be counterproductive

[sphealey]

> "Did you ever stop to think how silly and also how dangerous
> it is to live our lives with absolutely no monitoring of our
> body's medical status?

One thing you find as you get older and start having more tests, particularly if you have a doctor that likes to keep up with the latest research, is that each test you have for a specific parameter will also return results on 8-10 other parameters - that's just the way med labs are set up. And of those 8-10 parameters neither your doctor nor you intended to test at least one will be out-of-limits for your sex/age/weight/height. A little research in the latest medical data (by your doctor) or you (on the Internet) will quickly reveal that having parameter 7 out-of-limit can lead to immediate doom. Or not - the research is inconclusive.

So what do you do now? As I said every time you have a test you are going to come back with at least 1, and maybe more, new things to be concerned about. Should you start some sort of treatment for that out-of-limit condition? What side effects should you accept for treating something that was causing you no problems? What new conditions will be revealed every year when you are tested for the consequences of taking the treatment for the last revealed problem?

I saw in the WSJ about a year ago that the FDA was getting ready to approve 5 new reactive protein tests. Well, the c-reactive-protein test has been of some benefit in diagnosing early-stage heart disease. Maybe. Or maybe it has just increased sales of Lipitor(tm); no one is sure. What about these 5 new proteins? Should we all be tested for them? Why?

sPh

Re:Can be counterproductive

[lyml]

After all, I have a 0.056% chance per year of getting lung cancer (169,400 cases per year, 300 million US citizens, easy math).

In other news shooting yourself in the face only increases chance of death by 0.1% per year. (6 million cases per year, 6 billion people in the world, easy math)

You can have my vital signs ...

[Ihlosi]

... when you pry them from my cold, dead body.

Welcome to 2020 ...

[Ihlosi]

... where you're not going to die from a lot of causes that were common just ten years ago. The most common cause of death is now complications from implanting several pounds of electronics in your body, and while that's unfortunately enough to keep the mortality rate at just the same level, it's usually less painful.

Dangerous

[thethibs]

Given that the state is responsible for the cost of your health care, getting the chip won't be voluntary. Needless to say, if the monitors detected something life-threatening, they'd have to be able to send someone to help you; that means they also have to know where you are.

We know where you are, we can read all your bio-signs, and we are mandated to protect our investment in health care. Don't run so fast. Keep it down to one orgasm. Put down that cigarette. That's your last coffee for today. Sound silly? Remember when we were silly to suggest they'd be banning smoking in bars next?

Yah--we really look forward to having our chips installed. Am I the only one who would prefer a long painful death?

I don't think so

[Anonymous Coward]

I actually used to monitor these things myself, and I found it led to a higher level of stress and even drove me to panic attacks. Monitoring anything extensively is obsession, and an obsession can make you neglect other things, such as mental health.

Re:Useless and redundant

[bretticus]

What? We can do an EKG and measure troponin and sometimes not know for certain whether someone had a heart attack. Many people have atypical presentations, especially women. You also have things like "chest pain" that are actually reflux, or the person could be having an anxiety attack. Sure, you may know something is wrong, but not necessarily how serious -- just take Natasha Richardson.

Not thinking things through

[mbone]

The possibilities are enormous.

Indeed. Maybe in 2050 our descendants will read

People look back and find it unbelievable that just a few short years ago hundreds of bodily vital signs were not continuously anticipated and monitored by medical implants for the majority of the populace. ... The huge amounts of data that are accumulated from millions of continuously monitored people are nothing short of a revolution for the control of the population and the detection of doubt and hostility to the thoughts of our beloved leader.

...and will be used against you

[AliasMarlowe]

"There are cannabinoids in your bloodstream. The SWAT team has been alerted. Please wait for them to arrive and beat you up."

OR:
"Your blood alcohol level is above the legal limit. A police officer is on the way. Please stop your vehicle immediately and wait to be arrested."
And it would do this even if you were driving on your own private road, or driving a tractor on your own land (hint: DUI rules apply only on public roads, parking lots, etc.).

Re:...and will be used against you

[plsavaria]

DUI (driving with more than 0.08) is only for motor driving (car, boat, snowmobile, tractor, plane).
But you still can get a ticket for riding a horse while drunk, though the consequences are a lot less important. A 100$ ticket.
http://lejournaldequebec.canoe.ca/journaldequebec/actualites/quebec/archives/2009/01/20090123-120605.html/ Two months ago in Trois-RiviÃres.

WTF?

[wurp]

I fail to see how monitoring my body automatically and being informed when my lifestyle leads to risk of serious ill health is "constantly try to eliminate every imaginable element of risk".

I put on a wrist strap, forget about it, and then I get a notice every few months that I need more exercise, or I need to cut out saturated fats. Or, I even get a couple of notices daily to tell me to go eat a banana to maintain a blood sugar level that will keep me feeling good.

That sounds pretty damn good to me. Most adults are killed by cancer or heart disease, and most cancer and heart disease are curable if caught early. It sounds to me like a system only an idiot would turn down.

Seriously, if you live the way you're proposing, you would ride your motorcycle helmet-less back & forth to work every day, dine on bacon cheeseburgers and chili cheese fries, and only ever exercise if it was fun. I'm all for your right to live that way, but I refuse to let your snide commentary on people who choose to put a little work into living happy, long lives stand without refutation.

(Note: this commentary is really directed as much at moderators as at the parent. A +5 Insightful comment naturally gets a more visceral reaction than the same comment at 2.)

I envisioned it more like this -background monitor

[spineboy]

So when you urinate in the morning, the toilet might check for excessive proteins to look for kidney damage, or myeloma, or see if there is sugar (diabetes). It might also check the toilet for blood to see if you have a bleed from a colon tumor, or ulcer.
Maybe a little chip to monitor blood pressure, cholesterol, triglycerides.

Or better yet, heart rate, oxygenation, and BP levels, to monitor your exercise tolerance - to see if you are fit. It would automatically upload it to your house computer. You could also check on your baby - uh oh junior has a fever - 103 - yikes let's go to the doctor.

This would be best if it were for preventative measures

Ignorance != Bliss

[aricusmaximus]

It's infuriating to see the the semi-luddite rantings of the parent post got modded insightful. Makes me wonder why I even read Slashdot anymore.

Clearly the parent poster believes that monitoring devices are for ninnies and the weak. I assume that he follows his logic to it's logical conclusion and

- carefully disables all monitoring and warning devices on all/any vehicles he drives - after all engine check lights are for sissies!
- removes any and all air quality detectors (smoke/carbon monoxide/radon) from his homes (not to mention any security systems)
- if a sysadmin, avoids the use of any and all alterts, alarms, and carefully avoids the instalation of monitoring systems

The fact is that if this was about managing a server farm or a commercial jetliner instead of a person's body there wouldn't be a doubt in anyone's mind that recieving timely accurate information about system health and integrity is a *good* thing.

Ignorance is *not* bliss, and having more information doesn't mean that you necessarily turn into a hypochondriac. It *does* mean you have the knowledge to make responsible, informed choices -- and/or not to.

Pre-emptive monitoring for signs of heart attacks and strokes are no joking matter and detecting these early on mean the difference between mild and serious, life-altering damage or death. But apparently ignorance will be bliss for the parent poster until the "surprise" stroke, adult-onset-diabetes, heart-attack, or too-late cancer diagnosis.

Re:Ignorance != Bliss

[gad_zuki!]

Because random tests are flawed. How many times do we need to hear about missed heart conditions or even missed diabetes because an annual random test is not effective as constant real time monitoring for an extended period?

The only reason we have the "annual checkup" system is not because its effective but because its cheap.

The body monitors its own status.

[dpbsmith]

"Did you ever stop to think how silly and also how dangerous it is to live our lives with absolutely no monitoring of our body's medical status?"

The body monitors its own status continously and constantly takes corrective actions. The process is called homeostasis, a word invented by Walter B. Cannon in the 1930s although the concept is much older.

You might as well say:

"Did you ever stop to think how silly and dangerous it is to live our lives with absolutely nothing monitoring our posture to keep us from falling over?"

"Did you ever stop to think how silly and dangerous it is to walk around with absolutely no electrodes on our chests to keep our hearts beating?"

"Did you ever stop to think how silly and dangerous it is to walk around with absolutely no portable diathermy machine to hold our body temperature at 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit?"

This is not to say that canes and electronic pacemakers... and, for all I know, portable diathermy machines... might not be helpful to some people, but the body has a great capacity to take care of itself without medical intervention.

The return of Clippy.

[palegray.net]

"I see you're trying to compose a child with your wife. Would you like some help?"