Posted: Jun 7 2007, 04:34 AM
Uproar flares over Verichip Implants for Alzheimer’s patients
Celeste Biever
NEW SCIENTIST MAGAZINE
Wednesday June 6, 2007
http://www.buffalonews.com/185/story/91431.html
It looks deceptively familiar. The patient rolls up his sleeve, the doctor sticks a needle into his arm, and soon it’s all over. But this is no routine vaccination. Instead, the patient has been injected with a fleck of silicon that will uniquely identify him when zapped with radio waves. Now, nearly three years after their use was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, implantable radio frequency identification (RFID) chips are the focus of a new controversy.
The battle lines are being drawn in a quiet corner of West Palm Beach, Fla. In May, some 30 protesters held an interfaith prayer vigil outside Alzheimer’s Community Care, a day care facility for people with dementia. At issue is the facility’s plan to implant 200 patients with microchips manufactured and donated by VeriChip of nearby Delray Beach. When scanned, the chip reveals a unique ID number, which when entered into a password-protected database gives access to medical information about its owner.
If the plan goes ahead, it will be the first time the technology has been tried on a group of people with a specific mental impairment. The forgetfulness that comes with Alzheimer’s can make it impossible for people with the condition to pass on vital information when faced with a medical emergency, which is why advocates are keen to make use of RFID chips with this group.
“If for whatever reason — an automobile accident or hurricane — the person becomes separated from their loved one, they are totally, totally helpless. They can’t share what medically is wrong with them,” says Mary Barnes of Alzheimer’s Community Care. “This could be a safety net.”
Privacy advocates say that it is precisely this helplessness that makes the proposed use of the tags unacceptable. “This is a community that is not in a position to give fully informed consent or to say no,” says Katherine Albrecht, of CASPIAN, a Florida-based consumer rights organization. “The nature of the disease is that they can’t fully understand.”
Albrecht likens “the violent and invasive act” of implanting a chip in someone who does not have the ability to consent to the act of rape. Others agree with the sentiment, if not the comparison. “This is by definition a way of doing something that denies a person control,” says Lee Tien, of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, San Francisco. “If that doesn’t strike at the heart of human dignity, I don’t know what does.” He and Albrecht would rather see a chip implanted in a bracelet.
Barnes says a bracelet would not be nearly as useful. People might remove it if it got uncomfortable, especially those with Alzheimer’s, who might not understand why they should wear it.
Bracelets could also label people as mentally ill, whereas an implanted chip is much less obvious, says Rick Rader, of the Orange Grove Center, Chattanooga, Tenn. The center, which cares for children with Down syndrome, cerebral palsy and autism, was in the media spotlight two years ago when it considered using Veri- Chip’s device in a similar study on its patients, a plan that has since been put on the back burner.
At the time, there was an outcry from those who saw an implantable RFID as reminiscent of the “mark of the beast,” as described in the Book of Revelation. As explained on Albrecht’s Web site, the Bible states that people who take the mark of the beast — a mark on the right hand or the forehead that contains a number or a name that is required for buying and selling — will receive a “grievous sore” as well as the “wrath of God,” while those who refuse will be rewarded.
It is something Albrecht, a Christian, takes seriously. “I don’t think anyone is arguing that the VeriChip implant in its current incarnation would meet that definition,” she says. “But the concern for many people is that this would be a necessary precursor to getting to that point and therefore probably should be objected to.”
--------------------
The Most Powerful Man In The World
THE SUPERIOR GENERAL
(THE BLACK POPE)
- Peter Hans Kolvenbach -
Uproar flares over Verichip Implants for Alzheimer’s patients
Celeste Biever
NEW SCIENTIST MAGAZINE
Wednesday June 6, 2007
http://www.buffalonews.com/185/story/91431.html
It looks deceptively familiar. The patient rolls up his sleeve, the doctor sticks a needle into his arm, and soon it’s all over. But this is no routine vaccination. Instead, the patient has been injected with a fleck of silicon that will uniquely identify him when zapped with radio waves. Now, nearly three years after their use was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, implantable radio frequency identification (RFID) chips are the focus of a new controversy.
The battle lines are being drawn in a quiet corner of West Palm Beach, Fla. In May, some 30 protesters held an interfaith prayer vigil outside Alzheimer’s Community Care, a day care facility for people with dementia. At issue is the facility’s plan to implant 200 patients with microchips manufactured and donated by VeriChip of nearby Delray Beach. When scanned, the chip reveals a unique ID number, which when entered into a password-protected database gives access to medical information about its owner.
If the plan goes ahead, it will be the first time the technology has been tried on a group of people with a specific mental impairment. The forgetfulness that comes with Alzheimer’s can make it impossible for people with the condition to pass on vital information when faced with a medical emergency, which is why advocates are keen to make use of RFID chips with this group.
“If for whatever reason — an automobile accident or hurricane — the person becomes separated from their loved one, they are totally, totally helpless. They can’t share what medically is wrong with them,” says Mary Barnes of Alzheimer’s Community Care. “This could be a safety net.”
Privacy advocates say that it is precisely this helplessness that makes the proposed use of the tags unacceptable. “This is a community that is not in a position to give fully informed consent or to say no,” says Katherine Albrecht, of CASPIAN, a Florida-based consumer rights organization. “The nature of the disease is that they can’t fully understand.”
Albrecht likens “the violent and invasive act” of implanting a chip in someone who does not have the ability to consent to the act of rape. Others agree with the sentiment, if not the comparison. “This is by definition a way of doing something that denies a person control,” says Lee Tien, of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, San Francisco. “If that doesn’t strike at the heart of human dignity, I don’t know what does.” He and Albrecht would rather see a chip implanted in a bracelet.
Barnes says a bracelet would not be nearly as useful. People might remove it if it got uncomfortable, especially those with Alzheimer’s, who might not understand why they should wear it.
Bracelets could also label people as mentally ill, whereas an implanted chip is much less obvious, says Rick Rader, of the Orange Grove Center, Chattanooga, Tenn. The center, which cares for children with Down syndrome, cerebral palsy and autism, was in the media spotlight two years ago when it considered using Veri- Chip’s device in a similar study on its patients, a plan that has since been put on the back burner.
At the time, there was an outcry from those who saw an implantable RFID as reminiscent of the “mark of the beast,” as described in the Book of Revelation. As explained on Albrecht’s Web site, the Bible states that people who take the mark of the beast — a mark on the right hand or the forehead that contains a number or a name that is required for buying and selling — will receive a “grievous sore” as well as the “wrath of God,” while those who refuse will be rewarded.
It is something Albrecht, a Christian, takes seriously. “I don’t think anyone is arguing that the VeriChip implant in its current incarnation would meet that definition,” she says. “But the concern for many people is that this would be a necessary precursor to getting to that point and therefore probably should be objected to.”
--------------------
The Most Powerful Man In The World
THE SUPERIOR GENERAL
(THE BLACK POPE)
- Peter Hans Kolvenbach -
end of article----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. BLOGMASTER NOTE: [Highlighted "Mark of the Beast" statement.] Normally, I do not agree with all the opinions or views expressed in all the articles that I post on this forum. However (this topic merits extensive explanation), "the mark of the beast", that I have come to understand is not a (tangible) microchip per se, but sunday worship. The "Blue Laws"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_law (Sunday: Buy and Sell restrictions) that are still on the books of most states, will one day be more fully enforced; Then, those that will decide to succumb (for fear of loss of their employment, depravation, and hunger) to the dictatorial Sunday Legislations will receive "The Mark of The Beast".
Further documented explanation:
{As the sign of the authority of the Catholic Church, papist writers cite, "the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of . . . because by keeping Sunday strictly they acknowledge the church's power to ordain feasts, and to command them under sin." ["ABRIDGMENT OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE."] What then is the change of the Sabbath, but the sign or mark of the authority of the Romish Church--"the mark of the beast"? } The Great Controversy (1888), page 448, paragraph 2/ Chapter Title: Chapter XXV - God's Law Immutable. @ http://www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/cgi-bin/egw2html?C=29990070&K=131009060710710456
No comments:
Post a Comment