Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FCC OKs On-Body Medical Networks

Posted by samzenpus on from the can-you-feel-the-waves? dept.

itwbennett writes "On Wednesday the FCC approved the use of medical micropower networks (MMNs) in four blocks of the 400MHz spectrum band despite opposition from broadcast engineers who say they are concerned about interference. MMNs can be used to bypass areas of the nervous system that have been impaired by strokes or spinal cord or brain injuries."

5 of 41 comments (clear)

  1. How does this help me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    with my plan on world domination?

    Posting Anonymously for obvious reasons.

  2. This could go horribly wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unless these devices have even the most basic of basic frequency-knocking or some sort of unique ID system, this could end up horribly wrong.
    God forbid some poor people ended up next to each other and interfered with each other.

    If they do, however, then alls good. Completely for it.
    Frequency-knocking or ID systems would prevent any interference outside of malicious intent.
    So the devices would essentially be safe in almost all cases.

    Now the only worry would be EMP explosions that could completely nuke the circuit. Let's hope they thought of that...

    1. Re:This could go horribly wrong. by ATestR · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, the real concern was interference from Amateur Radio signals. The frequency range that these devices plan to use is in the 440 - 450 MHz range... which is right where a bunch of the little hand held ham radio units operate. The ARRL (National Amateur Radio Association) was the biggest group against the proposed usage, and the FCC only permitted the use with the prevision that it was Secondary to the existing licensees (HAMs). In other words, the medical devices cannot interfere with the radios, and they have to be able to live with any signals produced by radios. Here is an in depth article regarding the FCC grant.

      --
      âoeAny society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
  3. Why wireless by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In some instances, like communicating to implants from the outside without breaching the skin barrier, I can understand the use of radio signals - although induction sounds simpler, less power-hungry and more localized to me.

    But for implant-to-implant communication? This reminds me furiously of the wireless bicycle odometer idiocy, whereby a transmitter is used to transmit wheel rotation signals a couple of feet up to the odometer proper, using two batteries instead of one, and making the entire thing more expensive, less reliable and more prone to signal jamming, just for the sake of not running a 2-ft cable up a brake cable.

    If they're going to implant devices in someone's organism, they should just run wires under the skin: bio-compatible materials exist that wires can be made of (heck, they're already implanting the devices anyway), they'll get better throughput and latency, the devices will require less power, will be less complicated, and more importantly, will be immune to outside signals.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  4. Re:One step closer by silverglade00 · · Score: 4, Funny

    He only needs/wants the red one.