whats this ???

Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
edited April 2010 in A Moving Train
can't be real.....

Godfather.

BILLS REQUIRE THE MICRO CHIPPING OF AMERICANS – 3/18/10
Required RFID implanted chip
Sec. 2521, Pg. 1000 – The government will establish a National Medical Device Registry. What does a National Medical Device Registry mean?

National Medical Device Registry from H.R. 3200 [Healthcare Bill], pages 1001-1008:

(g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that— ‘‘(A) is or has been used in or on a patient; ‘‘(B)and is— ‘‘(i) a class III device; or ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.”

Then on page 1004 it describes what the term “data” means in paragraph 1,

section B:
‘‘(B) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to information respecting a device described in paragraph (1), including claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary”

What exactly is a class II device that is implantable? Approved by the FDA, a class II implantable device is an “implantable radio frequency transponder system for patient identification and health information.” The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as “claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary.”

See it for yourself: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/MedicalDev ... 072191.pdf

This new law – when fully implemented – provides the framework for making the United States the first nation in the world to require each and every one of its citizens to have implanted in them a radio-frequency identification (RFID) microchip for the purpose of controlling who is, or isn’t, allowed medical care in their country.

Don’t believe it? Look it up yourself. Healthcare Bill H.R. 3200: http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf ... 001xml.pdf

Pages 1001-1008 “National Medical Device Registry” section.
Page 1006 “to be enacted within 36 months upon passage”
Page 503 “… medical device surveillance”

Why would the government use the word “surveillance” when referring to citizens? The definition of “surveillance” is the monitoring of the behavior, activities, or other changing information, usually of people and often in a secret manner. The root of the word [French] means to “watch over.”

In theory, the intent to streamline healthcare and to eliminate fraud via “health chips” seems right. But, to have the world’s lone superpower (America, for now) mandate (page 1006) a device to be IMPLANTED is scary!

Microchiping included in Healthcare Bill?
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/105079

Coverage under Obamacare will require an implantable microchip?
http://current.com/items/90842279_cover ... rochip.htm
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • badbrainsbadbrains Posts: 10,255
    Oh it's REAL and it's coming....
  • I think they are talking about implantable devices... like pacemakers... and knowing the results of the pacemaker (whether it worked and how long).

    I really don't think anyone is going to hold you down and put a chip in your brain, but hey, thats just me.
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    badbrains wrote:
    Oh it's REAL and it's coming....

    they'll have to kill me first.

    Godfather.
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    I think they are talking about implantable devices... like pacemakers... and knowing the results of the pacemaker (whether it worked and how long).

    I really don't think anyone is going to hold you down and put a chip in your brain, but hey, thats just me.
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    Godfather. wrote:
    I think they are talking about implantable devices... like pacemakers... and knowing the results of the pacemaker (whether it worked and how long).

    I really don't think anyone is going to hold you down and put a chip in your brain, but hey, thats just me.

    I hope so.

    Godfather.
  • This is not mandatory micro-chipping. Show me in the language of the bill where it says microchips are required?

    This is creating a federal database and tracking the information from the microchips that OTHER companies - not the government - implant in patients. Same way the FDA follows-up and tracks drugs on the market looking for patterns that could be a problem. Without the government tracking performance and problems, you are implanting a device in a human being and then leaving it up to the maker of that device to handle (or not) defects and recalls.

    The reason anyone would CHOOSE to get microchip in the first place is if they have a condition that might require a quick scan by a doctor or the ER for critical information. If you travel a lot or have a particular condition, this could be life-saving. However, you have to be able to trust the company making the chips. Would you blindly do that? Or would you want the manufacturers to have government oversight and government safety requirements as well as requirements for how the data can or cannot be transferred?

    So the gov't is not tracking your health, the government is tracking the safety of the device - and there's nothing mandatory about getting one.

    Also, the FDA link in your post is to a 2004 document for manufacturers of these devices. There is nothing in it that claims that these devices need to be developed or would ever be required. It is a guideline if a company wants to develop a device like that (aren't we all about capitalism, after all? )


    EDIT: Here is a perfect example of why you cannot trust the manufacturer and why we need to give the FDA more power to track these devices - one of them was causing cancer: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20643620/
  • Here is one of the U.S. companies offering these devices to consumers: verichip.com


    And here is FOX promoting the use of Verichip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAI2-_hnFH0
  • It upsets me to no end that articles like this are being passed around because nobody does their homework anymore, they just believe this one guy's totally biased interpretation. I can't tell if he's outright lying to get less-informed people all riled up or if he's really just too stupid to read the bill correctly on his own.

    Example:
    "mandate (page 1006) a device to be IMPLANTED is scary! "

    Read page 1006 and show me where it "mandates a device to be IMPLANTED"

    Please do.
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    This is not mandatory micro-chipping. Show me in the language of the bill where it says microchips are required?

    This is creating a federal database and tracking the information from the microchips that OTHER companies - not the government - implant in patients. Same way the FDA follows-up and tracks drugs on the market looking for patterns that could be a problem. Without the government tracking performance and problems, you are implanting a device in a human being and then leaving it up to the maker of that device to handle (or not) defects and recalls.

    The reason anyone would CHOOSE to get microchip in the first place is if they have a condition that might require a quick scan by a doctor or the ER for critical information. If you travel a lot or have a particular condition, this could be life-saving. However, you have to be able to trust the company making the chips. Would you blindly do that? Or would you want the manufacturers to have government oversight and government safety requirements as well as requirements for how the data can or cannot be transferred?

    So the gov't is not tracking your health, the government is tracking the safety of the device - and there's nothing mandatory about getting one.

    Also, the FDA link in your post is to a 2004 document for manufacturers of these devices. There is nothing in it that claims that these devices need to be developed or would ever be required. It is a guideline if a company wants to develop a device like that (aren't we all about capitalism, after all? )


    EDIT: Here is a perfect example of why you cannot trust the manufacturer and why we need to give the FDA more power to track these devices - one of them was causing cancer: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20643620/

    hay did you cheat and read the whole thing ? :lol:
    thanks. ;)

    Godfather.
  • Godfather. wrote:

    hay did you cheat and read the whole thing ? :lol:
    thanks. ;)

    Godfather.

    :lol:

    I have to admit it..it came up about a month ago so I got a jump on the subject back then. But, yeah, I did read pages 1001-1008 (or whatever it is), they used a really big font so it was quick :)
  • __ Posts: 6,651
    It upsets me to no end that articles like this are being passed around because nobody does their homework anymore, they just believe this one guy's totally biased interpretation. I can't tell if he's outright lying to get less-informed people all riled up or if he's really just too stupid to read the bill correctly on his own.

    Example:
    "mandate (page 1006) a device to be IMPLANTED is scary! "

    Read page 1006 and show me where it "mandates a device to be IMPLANTED"

    Please do.

    Thank you.
  • StarfallStarfall Posts: 548
    This is not mandatory micro-chipping. Show me in the language of the bill where it says microchips are required?

    This is creating a federal database and tracking the information from the microchips that OTHER companies - not the government - implant in patients. Same way the FDA follows-up and tracks drugs on the market looking for patterns that could be a problem. Without the government tracking performance and problems, you are implanting a device in a human being and then leaving it up to the maker of that device to handle (or not) defects and recalls.

    The reason anyone would CHOOSE to get microchip in the first place is if they have a condition that might require a quick scan by a doctor or the ER for critical information. If you travel a lot or have a particular condition, this could be life-saving. However, you have to be able to trust the company making the chips. Would you blindly do that? Or would you want the manufacturers to have government oversight and government safety requirements as well as requirements for how the data can or cannot be transferred?

    So the gov't is not tracking your health, the government is tracking the safety of the device - and there's nothing mandatory about getting one.

    Also, the FDA link in your post is to a 2004 document for manufacturers of these devices. There is nothing in it that claims that these devices need to be developed or would ever be required. It is a guideline if a company wants to develop a device like that (aren't we all about capitalism, after all? )


    EDIT: Here is a perfect example of why you cannot trust the manufacturer and why we need to give the FDA more power to track these devices - one of them was causing cancer: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20643620/

    Beat me to it.
    I think I can retire now. :lol:
    "It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
  • CJMST3KCJMST3K Posts: 9,722
    I really don't think anyone is going to hold you down and put a chip in your brain, but hey, thats just me.

    I think "they" do want to track me... but I'm ok with that. :D
    ADD 5,200 to the post count you see, thank you. :)
    *NYC 9/28/96 *NYC 9/29/96 *NJ 9/8/98 (front row "may i play drums with you")
    *MSG 9/10/98 (backstage) *MSG 9/11/98 (backstage)
    *Jones Beach 8/23/00 *Jones Beach 8/24/00 *Jones Beach 8/25/00
    *Mansfield 8/29/00 *Mansfield 8/30/00 *Nassau 4/30/03 *Nissan VA 7/1/03
    *Borgata 10/1/05 *Camden 5/27/06 *Camden 5/28/06 *DC 5/30/06
    *VA Beach 6/17/08 *DC 6/22/08 *MSG 6/24/08 (backstage) *MSG 6/25/08
    *EV DC 8/17/08 *EV Baltimore 6/15/09 *Philly 10/31/09
    *Bristow VA 5/13/10 *MSG 5/20/10 *MSG 5/21/10
  • StarfallStarfall Posts: 548
    CJMST3K wrote:
    I really don't think anyone is going to hold you down and put a chip in your brain, but hey, thats just me.

    I think "they" do want to track me... but I'm ok with that. :D

    Why implant people with RFIDs when they can track you just as easily on your cell phone or your credit card? There's nothing that can be stored on a chip that isn't already readily available not just to the NSA but to numerous private corporations.
    "It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
  • Starfall wrote:

    Beat me to it.
    I think I can retire now. :lol:

    Ack! No, don't go! You're so much funnier than I am :)
    CJMST3K wrote:
    I think "they" do want to track me... but I'm ok with that. :D

    Be careful what you wish for...first they implant you, then they track you, then they "probe" you :lol:
  • StarfallStarfall Posts: 548
    Starfall wrote:

    Beat me to it.
    I think I can retire now. :lol:

    Ack! No, don't go! You're so much funnier than I am :)

    True, I'm used to being laughed at for sure. :lol:
    Be careful what you wish for...first they implant you, then they track you, then they "probe" you :lol:

    Sounds like a typical Saturday night in San Francisco. :mrgreen:
    "It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
  • cajunkiwicajunkiwi Posts: 984
    Starfall wrote:

    Beat me to it.
    I think I can retire now. :lol:

    Ack! No, don't go! You're so much funnier than I am :)
    CJMST3K wrote:
    I think "they" do want to track me... but I'm ok with that. :D

    Be careful what you wish for...first they implant you, then they track you, then they "probe" you :lol:

    Maybe he's hoping for the probe. You know, if she's cute and still respects you in the morning it might not be so bad.
    And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
Sign In or Register to comment.