PDA

View Full Version : The Scary part of Obamascare



Terry Britton
03-31-2010, 10:05 PM
http://goldfuture.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/both-house-and-senate-health-bills-require-the-micro-chipping-of-americans-31810/


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/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm072191.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/111/AAHCA09001xml.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!

Buzz
03-31-2010, 10:48 PM
This surely means that the end times are upon us.

JDogger
03-31-2010, 11:34 PM
OMG....my dog has a chip too...?? Is the AKC gonna track us both? Ya mean, I can't just post titles to my dogs name without fear of being checked?

JD

CH Butt Licks CD CDX LX TDI CGC FFA CBL CBLX....and so forth, and so on...

Henry V
03-31-2010, 11:39 PM
Yes, scary as in "scary movie".

The purpose is "to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device." Then as clearly described it sets a framework to make sure that the data on devices is tracked to outcomes. Page 503 is part of a description of "Comparative Effectiveness Research" Did you look at the context?
....encourage, as appropriate, the development and use of clinical registries and the development of clinical effectiveness research data networks from electronic health records, post marketing drug and medical device surveillance efforts, and other forms of electronic health data.
Surveillance is also brought up on page 653, 858, 965, 980, etc. Pay particular attention to 965. There is an entire title section on "Quality and Surveillance". Those sneeky b@stards hiding this stuff in plain sight. I bet they never mention patient "privacy" in the entire bill.;)

Here are two great solutions for all those concerned about this obvious problem.
1) Do not let any doctors enter your health care data into an electronic database and certainly do not get any medical device installed, or
2) Only go to doctors who do not record electronic records and those that have no interest in monitoring medical device outcomes.

That will show them. Problem solved.

Grasping at straws to insight fear but please keep posting this stuff regards,

YardleyLabs
04-01-2010, 06:24 AM
I have mixed reactions to using RFID's to capture medical information. However, if the option were there, I would elect to have one simply because I have a complex medical history. However, this particular provision of HR 3200 was not included in the health plan as adopted, leaving open the question of approaches that might be used to allow more effective electronic exchanges of medical records data between service providers to avoid the need for test duplication.

Hoosier
04-01-2010, 09:04 AM
I have mixed reactions to using RFID's to capture medical information. However, if the option were there, I would elect to have one simply because I have a complex medical history. However, this particular provision of HR 3200 was not included in the health plan as adopted, leaving open the question of approaches that might be used to allow more effective electronic exchanges of medical records data between service providers to avoid the need for test duplication.

You can see how someone would not want something like this for religious reasons though, am I correct in assuming that much?

I'm not sure if this made it into the final bill or not, but the fact that it was in there in the first place shows at a minimum a major disconnect between the left (who wrote the bill) and fundamentalist Christians.

Buzz
04-01-2010, 09:07 AM
You can see how someone would not want something like this for religious reasons though, am I correct in assuming that much?

I'm not sure if this made it into the final bill or not, but the fact that it was in there in the first place shows at a minimum a major disconnect between the left (who wrote the bill) and fundamentalist Christians.


My comment may have looked like sarcasm, but this is exactly what I was talking about.

Hoosier
04-01-2010, 09:13 AM
My comment may have looked like sarcasm, but this is exactly what I was talking about.

Clarify this for me, will you?

M&K's Retrievers
04-01-2010, 09:43 AM
How else can Dr. McCoy stand over us with his little scanning gizmo that will both diagnose and cure what ails us.

Damn it, Jim, I'm a doctor not a dog trainer regards,

YardleyLabs
04-01-2010, 10:02 AM
There are two separate issues being addressed in the two documents referenced. In the first, the FDA is announcing standards for approving the safety of RFID devices developed to provide a vehicle for storing an encrypted security code that could be used to obtain access to confidential records. It has nothing whatsoever to do with universal insertion of such devices or in fact any particular use of such devices.

The language in the bill also has absolutely nothing to do with inserting devices into people for purposes of surveillance. The medical device registry described on pages 1001-1008 is a database concerning medical devices manufactured to permit data to be gathered on post-use effectiveness to identified potential hazards associated with those devices. Thus, it would require a unique identifier to be used on, for example, an artificial knee so that, in the event that future problems arise, it is possible to determine the exact source of the replacement part. Within "36 months" the secretary is required to promulgate regulations for unique identification of such devices and to begin gathering data n device outcomes. This is the "medical device surveillance" program referenced on page 503. The words quoted in the post have been taken totally out of context. If you actually read pages 1001-1008 it is immediately apparent that there is no relationship at all between what is described in the post and what is described in the bill.

EDIT: To be clear, the part of the bill included on page 503 is related to the establishment of a program for comparing medical effectiveness of different treatments. It states that the designated office shall have responsibility for a number of activities to make such research more useful including:

‘‘(E) encourage, as appropriate, the devel-
opment and use of clinical registries and the de-
velopment of clinical effectiveness research data
networks from electronic health records, post
marketing drug and medical device surveillance
efforts, and other forms of electronic health
data."

It's amazing how much paranoia can be fed by extracting a few words out of context and using them encourage fear/

Uncle Bill
04-01-2010, 10:21 AM
Oh dear, what's a mother to do, Henry? And to think we were worried about our phone getting tapped by some wascally wepublican?

"Grasping at straws to insight fear but please keep posting this stuff regards,"


Psst...next time try 'instigate', or 'arouse', or 'foment'. Much harder to get them inadvertantly confused with a word of a completely different meaning...however amusing.

FWIW, Henry, stick to the graphs. Your 'grasp' of that superfluous tripe is most enlightening...not to mention how it makes HEW's day.


UB

Terry Britton
04-01-2010, 03:29 PM
There are two separate issues being addressed in the two documents referenced. In the first, the FDA is announcing standards for approving the safety of RFID devices developed to provide a vehicle for storing an encrypted security code that could be used to obtain access to confidential records. It has nothing whatsoever to do with universal insertion of such devices or in fact any particular use of such devices.

The language in the bill also has absolutely nothing to do with inserting devices into people for purposes of surveillance. The medical device registry described on pages 1001-1008 is a database concerning medical devices manufactured to permit data to be gathered on post-use effectiveness to identified potential hazards associated with those devices. Thus, it would require a unique identifier to be used on, for example, an artificial knee so that, in the event that future problems arise, it is possible to determine the exact source of the replacement part. Within "36 months" the secretary is required to promulgate regulations for unique identification of such devices and to begin gathering data n device outcomes. This is the "medical device surveillance" program referenced on page 503. The words quoted in the post have been taken totally out of context. If you actually read pages 1001-1008 it is immediately apparent that there is no relationship at all between what is described in the post and what is described in the bill.

EDIT: To be clear, the part of the bill included on page 503 is related to the establishment of a program for comparing medical effectiveness of different treatments. It states that the designated office shall have responsibility for a number of activities to make such research more useful including:

‘‘(E) encourage, as appropriate, the devel-
opment and use of clinical registries and the de-
velopment of clinical effectiveness research data
networks from electronic health records, post
marketing drug and medical device surveillance
efforts, and other forms of electronic health
data."

It's amazing how much paranoia can be fed by extracting a few words out of context and using them encourage fear/

I have proposed the medical device surveillance myself several years ago combining cell phone technology with a pacemaker, sensors, remote telemetry, and GPS location. The bundled technology would be set to sense a heart attack, and alert an medical care to an immediate response to your exact GPS location. Technology can be used for good or evil, and putting a chip in everyone is wrong. Putting a bundled technology in someone with a major health concern that requests and PAYS for the technology on their own is a different story.

YardleyLabs
04-01-2010, 03:34 PM
I have proposed the medical device surveillance myself several years ago combining cell phone technology with a pacemaker, sensors, remote telemetry, and GPS location. The bundled technology would be set to sense a heart attack, and alert an medical care to an immediate response to your exact GPS location. Technology can be used for good or evil, and putting a chip in everyone is wrong. Putting a bundled technology in someone with a major health concern that requests and PAYS for the technology on their own is a different story.
I agree that it would be wrong to require such a chip to be inserted into everyone. There is also nothing in either of the referenced sources that even vaguely hints at doing that.

Henry V
04-01-2010, 04:02 PM
Oh dear, what's a mother to do, Henry? And to think we were worried about our phone getting tapped by some wascally wepublican?

"Grasping at straws to insight fear but please keep posting this stuff regards,"


Psst...next time try 'instigate', or 'arouse', or 'foment'. Much harder to get them inadvertantly confused with a word of a completely different meaning...however amusing.

FWIW, Henry, stick to the graphs. Your 'grasp' of that superfluous tripe is most enlightening...not to mention how it makes HEW's day.


UB
You are precious Bill. I made a spelling error. Maybe next time you point that out you should make sure the spelling in your response is correct. Perhaps your error was made inadvertently even though the spell check clearly identified it, unlike mine.

Also, perhaps you would like to comment on the content of this thread instead of attacking my spelling? As has been proven repeatedly, the entire cut and paste that started this thread was a misleading lie to incite fear.

Also thanks for the insight into your reasoning. Facts on graphs apparently mean nothing. That explains a lot.

sinner
04-01-2010, 05:31 PM
Gees, right wing paranoia is wide spread.
The need for electronic medical data bases is critical for better care, faster response, failure of implanted devices, reducing costs etc. Ask any health care provider and you might want to look at the literature (medical scientific) at the frequency of implanted device failures.
Works well on your vehicles doesn't it?
Go figure...............

road kill
04-01-2010, 05:45 PM
You are precious Bill. I made a spelling error. Maybe next time you point that out you should make sure the spelling in your response is correct. Perhaps your error was made inadvertently even though the spell check clearly identified it, unlike mine.

Also, perhaps you would like to comment on the content of this thread instead of attacking my spelling? As has been proven repeatedly, the entire cut and paste that started this thread was a misleading lie to incite fear.

Also thanks for the insight into your reasoning. Facts on graphs apparently mean nothing. That explains a lot.

Wasn't that long ago you leftys were all about correcting my grammatical misadventures.
Today it all seem so pedestrian.
Which shoe, which foot????:D



rk

badbullgator
04-01-2010, 06:04 PM
I have proposed the medical device surveillance myself several years ago combining cell phone technology with a pacemaker, sensors, remote telemetry, and GPS location. The bundled technology would be set to sense a heart attack, and alert an medical care to an immediate response to your exact GPS location. Technology can be used for good or evil, and putting a chip in everyone is wrong. Putting a bundled technology in someone with a major health concern that requests and PAYS for the technology on their own is a different story.


There are already pacemakers that use very similar technology and allow them to be checked and the "pace" changed by phone

Henry V
04-01-2010, 06:23 PM
Wasn't that long ago you leftys were all about correcting my grammatical misadventures.
Today it all seem so pedestrian.
Which shoe, which foot????:D

rk
Yes, right, the lefties are the ones always correcting spelling just like in this thread. Perhaps you should check the titles of some threads recently ("the revolution is comming") or look for threads in the past where someone has tried to spell Afghanistan. The misspelled words were jumped on right away. Oh wait, that's not true either, is it?

subroc
04-01-2010, 06:28 PM
no looking at what someone views in a library, that is an invasion of privacy but let us implant a chip in you and we are all for that.

YardleyLabs
04-01-2010, 06:49 PM
no looking at what someone views in a library, that is an invasion of privacy but let us implant a chip in you and we are all for that.
The difference is that a law was passed making secret investigations of library records legal. The notion that someone is requiring Americans to be implanted with mini transmitters to allow tracking is the fabrication of a demented blogger citing lots of "sources" that do not provide any support for the story at all.

EDIT: It becomes even more fascinating when you begin to track the links. They ultimately go in a complete circle with multiple references to languages in bills that has nothing to do with the claims made, and references at the bottom of each page to http://www.opencongress.org that actually link to a completely different web site and still have nothing to do with the claims made. None of the stories is signed although one is by an anonymous person who claims to be a 100% supporter of Obama. You would think that the authors could be a little more careful when spreading complete disinformation. Fortunately they are targeting an audience that is critical of nothing as long as their prejudices and paranoia are reinforced.

Uncle Bill
04-02-2010, 11:04 AM
You are precious Bill. I made a spelling error. Maybe next time you point that out you should make sure the spelling in your response is correct. Perhaps your error was made inadvertently even though the spell check clearly identified it, unlike mine.

Also, perhaps you would like to comment on the content of this thread instead of attacking my spelling? As has been proven repeatedly, the entire cut and paste that started this thread was a misleading lie to incite fear.

Also thanks for the insight into your reasoning. Facts on graphs apparently mean nothing. That explains a lot.



Sorry Henry! No gold star for you. Your spelling wasn't in question...it was your knowlege.

A spell checker would have easily passed the word 'insight' since it's spelled correctly. Used as a word to mean 'incite' will not fall into the spell checkers domain, since it can't 'think' for you.

As to my "cut & paste" articles, I fail to see how you lefties get so antagonized over them as opposed to your posting a URL that needs to be punched up. Explain that difference, Oh Master of the Graphics.

BTW, how DO your graphs come about? Based on how upset you become over my posts written by documented authors, am I to assume you actually DRAW those graphs on your own Graphical Mosheen?

How sappy must I become to follow your line of thinking?

Go have another bowl of lutefisk, Henry. It's doing wonders for your mental faculties, as well as your power of reasoned persuasion.

UB