You MicroChip your pet,would you micro chip yourself?

[nubain1 0]

Here's a intersting article in this month's JEMS (Journal of Emergency Medical Services)
What do you think? Would you do it if it meant it could save your or a loved one's life?
Or is it a invasion of privacy that's not worth the risk.
Personally,I think it's a good idea,but there should be limits to who can access the info.



http://www.jems.com/news/233450/




Many question new patient data microchip

By Ann Geracimos
The Washington Times
Copyright 2006 News World Communications, Inc.

A microchip the size of a long grain of rice encased in a tiny glass capsule and injected into the upper right arm could, in an emergency, save a person's life.

The device, called VeriMed by its manufacturer, contains a series of 16 numbers — a code — that when read by a hand-held scanner can reveal key computerized medical information to properly registered people. The device is meant to help with treatment and prevent giving needless or possibly harmful medication to patients unable to talk to health care workers about their medical history and condition.

Admirers see it as a technological convenience no different from bar codes in supermarkets or the electronic EZ-Pass in one's car. Detractors say it has dangerous implications for civil liberties.


The problem is getting enough scanners and trained personnel in hospitals while simultaneously persuading enough people to be implanted with the chip, which is known as a passive radio frequency identification device, or RFID. The cost of an implant is between $150 and $400, and insurance does not yet cover the procedure.

"It's a three-prong approach, and all three [doctors, hospitals and patients] have to come together," explains Dr. Jonathan Musher, a Bethesda physician. He works for the manufacturer, VeriChip Corp. of Delray Beach, Fla., a subsidiary of Applied Digital, building what he calls "the network" required to make the chips effective. He says he was convinced of the device's merit before he joined the company and always has mixed his clinical practice — geriatrics and adult medicine — with what he calls "an administrative component."

Dr. Musher has about 260 doctors in his network and has implanted about 30 chips to date, mostly in elderly people who he says are those most likely to need the device — especially the senior population in assisted-living facilities and anyone suffering from mild dementia. About 2,200 patients have been implanted worldwide since the chip was introduced in 2004, he says.

"If someone presents to an emergency room who is comatose, he gets scanned, and important information comes up," Dr. Musher says, giving one example of how the chip would function to save time and avert mistakes. An authorized person would put in his own identifying number and, with a password, be able in five to 10 seconds to learn a patient's name and pertinent medical history.

"Let's say, worst case, someone can do that who is not authorized and they come up with a name, certain allergies, diagnoses and the fact [the patient is] on three or four medicines and has an advanced directive not to [take extreme measures] to resuscitate. I say, 'So what?' Everything in life is a risk-benefit. That is low risk versus the benefit."

Dr. Musher equates the procedure to getting an injection halfway between the right arm's shoulder and elbow, with a local anesthetic used to numb the site. "The body physiologically forms a cocoon around it," he says, adding that "the chip is not visible as it might be in the shin.

New medical data is added and old data changed by using a special password in the computer program that stores the information.

"It appealed to me immediately," says Roxanne Fischer, a biologist with a local government health agency whose 83-year-old mother has Alzheimer's disease. "I would love to see more people take advantage of this. Certainly anyone with pets thinks it is an incredible idea. I'd definitely get one myself. There is a lot to be said [for having] a means of identification on your body so you don't have to be carrying something."

Worry about identity theft doesn't bother her.

"Just the opposite," she says. "It is a passive chip and doesn't emit energy and can't be tracked."

Nevertheless, she says she might have been more skeptical if she had not known Dr. Musher as a physician caring for her mother. She cites troubles with her mother, who, when living alone in Florida, once was lost for two days after eluding a caregiver.

Daniel Hickey, 77, a naval commander living in a military retirement home, agrees. He has had the chip implanted although he is of sound mind and in relatively good health in spite of having had high blood pressure for most of his life.

"As soon as [Dr. Musher] mentioned it, I said, 'Why not?'" he says. "If you are unconscious and they wheel you into the emergency room, what do they know about you? Nothing. Even if you are conscious and in pain, you don't want to answer a bunch of questions."

High-profile supporters include former Wisconsin governor and U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson, now partner in the law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and a member of the board of the VeriChip Corp. His primary interest, he says, is promoting new technologies he believes are badly needed in the health care field - "It's my shtick." He once pledged publicly to have the chip put in himself, but says now that he is waiting until "more hospitals have signed up."

It's that chicken-and-egg question again.

Washington Hospital Center, the area's largest medical facility, has a scanner but has not trained anyone to use it because the chances an emergency patient will have a chip are slim, says spokeswoman Paula Faria.

"We don't feel we are at that point yet," she says.

Suburban Hospital in Bethesda and Shady Grove Adventist in Gaithersburg have scanners, supplied free by VeriChip, and have trained personnel to use them.

"I think it is better than any method to date," says Dr. Robert Rothstein, Suburban's director of emergency medicine, who is an advocate without any association with the corporation. "Plenty of people are around who could benefit. You can imagine when police find somebody wandering and they sit around and wait for somebody to call."

The chip's main opposition is a group called CASPIAN Consumer Advocacy, for Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering. One group leader is Katherine Albrecht, who holds a doctorate in education and is co-author of the book "Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move With RFID."

In a telephone interview, she raises questions about the technical proficiency of the chip — "The information may not always be there when you need it, especially in the case of natural disaster and where the community is not functioning at top-notch rate" — and asks rhetorically why a medical ID bracelet won't do as well.

New to the market is a product called the Portable Health Profile () that, for $49.95, provides a consumer with a mini-CD as well as a USB Flash Drive, both of which can store an individual's medical information and can be accessed by computer as needed.

Dr. Musher counters by pointing up the danger that bracelets and other portable devices can be lost and that patients, especially those with a form of dementia, are liable to pull off a bracelet.

[tkhayes 348]

Not a chance I would do that to myself.

My dog is not capable of identifying him/herself in any situation, hence the need for identification other than 'woof'

I am completely capable of related my identification and history, and when asked, I will do so.

Though, I would carry a card with the same information as the chip in my wallet if asked to. That way I can present it at my own will. And if I incapacitated, then the card is in my wallet - next to my organ donor card.

The chip allows the possibly being 'scanned' involuntarily everywhere I move, like airports, shopping, etc. Big Brother.

The chip is too easy to scan from a distance. A magnetic stripe on a card is almost impossible to scan from a distance.

TK

[nubain1 0]

I agree there are some drawbacks like that .If the tech could be made more reliable and unable to be read by others then i would do it.
Right now, no. I can look at it from both sides with teh pros and cons being in the med field myself.

[dustin19d 0]

I think soldiers should be "Micro Chiped"
Then we wouldn't be digging them up a year later to put the right parts into the right box
Saves the family a lot of grief also.....

[SpeedRacer 1]

I think it's a great idea. They could implant the microchips in your right palm or your forehead. No one would be allowed to buy or sell anything without it, so that all transactions could be traced.

Also, the implant should be marked with some identifying numerical code, say, 666 or something.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[RkyMtnHigh 0]

I had a thread about this in June when I was interviewing for Sales Trainer position with VeriMed..ended up in Speakers Corner for obvious reasons:

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2242968;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

_________________________________________

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

I think soldiers should be "Micro Chiped"
Then we wouldn't be digging them up a year later to put the right parts into the right box
Saves the family a lot of grief also.....

I don't know about you but the thought that someone might wind up in certain places in this world where they should not be, then get ID'd by a scan of a chip?

Then you will be burying more of those same men.

[dustin19d 0]

Hummm. Was thinking more along the lines of "Get it right the first time"

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

I agree there are some drawbacks like that .If the tech could be made more reliable and unable to be read by others then i would do it.
Right now, no. I can look at it from both sides with teh pros and cons being in the med field myself.

How significant are the pros????

My mom has been an ERTrauma nurse for over twenty years and tells me this has been a topic of discussion in the ER over the past few years. They had one new doc who insisted it would be a major benefit to emergency care.

Over three months, the nurses compiled a list of all major medical and trauma patients who were unable to communicate on arrival in the ER. The result? Major trauma? The treatment protocols are pretty much the same for everyone. If you are shot in the chest, no one on the trauma team is interested in your allergy to penicillin. Anaphylactic shock due to a severe allergy? You get treated with benadryl and epi, regardless of your specific allergy. Blood transfusion? Either O neg or based on a type and cross.

It wouldn't have made any difference in emergency treatment although one nurse thought it would be of benefit to identify Jehovah's Witnesses as they will not accept blood products.


Outside of Verimed staff and investors, it doesn't sound like a nation wide program would benefit many people.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[Gawain 0]

Quote

You MicroChip your pet

Because, despite their rights as living creatures, they are property, and because of those rights, their care is expected, and because they're property, their return is expected if lost.

Quote

would you micro chip yourself?

No. There are plenty of other methods available without inserting a foreign object in your body (finger prints for fast access to medical data if needed). Biometrics is the ticket.

Another question to add to the mix: "You microchip your pets (dependents), would your microchip your children?"

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[ladyskydiver 0]

For me, absolutely not. For pets, yes. Pets can not talk and say "I live at ____. My mommy/daddy's phone number is ___."

Actually I'd be against it for any human as I would not want the data to be used "accidentally" against them somehow/someway. I can just see it..."Your papers...whoops! I mean microchip?"

Life is short! Break the rules! Forgive quickly! Kiss slowly! Love truly, Laugh uncontrollably. And never regret anything that made you smile.

[Michele 1]

I agree with Cora. Furthermore, the chips which are put into pets do not contain medical information on the pet (as far as I know...), while this company seems to be advocating medical info for a human. Not something I want implanted into my arm...

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[ladyskydiver 0]

Quote

...the chips which are put into pets do not contain medical information on the pet (as far as I know...)...

You're correct. There is a number on the chip that is implanted. The data - parent's name, etc. - is housed at the company that sells the chips. Once the chip is scanned and the number displayed, the vet (or humane society) can then call a phone number and get the parent's info.

http://avidmicrochip.com/

Life is short! Break the rules! Forgive quickly! Kiss slowly! Love truly, Laugh uncontrollably. And never regret anything that made you smile.

[Botellines 0]

So the real bussiness is not how much they charge for implanting the microchip, but how much they are going to charge for accessing the database. And to who they are going to sell that permission.

[ladyskydiver 0]

From my limited exposure to the microchip and it's database (I'm behind the scenes), the customers are able to select "Do not sell/share my info" just like any other business who collects data.

The cost of the microchip is the implanation by the vet, the cost of the microchip itself, and the database storage and maintenance.

Life is short! Break the rules! Forgive quickly! Kiss slowly! Love truly, Laugh uncontrollably. And never regret anything that made you smile.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

From my limited exposure to the microchip and it's database (I'm behind the scenes), the customers are able to select "Do not sell/share my info" just like any other business who collects data.

history has shown that the privacy agreements sent to consumers don't even make good toilet paper.

A private company can't be trusted with a nationwide database of people's health information. (even if the health co's are cobbling such a thing already)

[Amazon 7]

Would the microchip have the requisite "666" prefix??

I bet that is a huge conundrum for the Righties in the administration and what they WANT to do..... and what their religious right base will allow them to do.