Page 1 of 7 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 131
  1.    #1  
    just some food for thought guys.... but in that 1000 page long mess that has constitutioal inclarity written all over it, seems to be the requirement of the RFID chip. So we can all be listed in the medical database.... just read this, it says it all.

    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/Medical.../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/...CA09001xml.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 not just scary. It is prophetic!

    Chip Linked To Your Bank Account
    The prophetic implications of this bill doesn’t stop with a mechanism by which you will be “chipped”. Section 163 of H.R. 3200, allows the government a direct, electronic access to your bank account, which will work in conjunction with an implanted chip.

    Page 58 of H.R. 3200 Lines 5 through 15 reads:

    (D) enable the real-time (or near real 6 time) determination of an individual’s financial responsibility at the point of service and, to the extent possible, prior to service, including whether the individual is eligible for a specific service with a specific physician at a specific facility, which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identity detection card; (E) enable, where feasible, near real-time adjudication of claims

    What does this mean? It means that the government will give everybody a health ID card that contains a machine readable device (magnetic strip or RFID chip) similar to a credit card. Embedded in this chip or strip containing your Health Identification Number When you visit a medical provider, the medical claims will be adjudicated [processed] while still in the office/facility. The medical providers will be paid in real time. The portion that you owe will be deducted from your bank account, in real time, according to HR 3200.

    Notice here, in this part which is at the beginning of the bill, it is carefully worded “which may include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identity detection card”. Here we are told that it may be a card. As you have already seen, deeper in the Bill [Sec. 2521 Pg. 1000] what this “may” utilize is clearly spelled out as a “class II device that is implantable”. We can only speculate at this point why the bill is set up this way. Could be a means of disguising the true intentions of chipping all citizens or could be a means of starting with a card for the sake of expedience while the process of chipping citizenry plays out.

    H.R. 3200 Health Care Reform Bill - Obama Care links your bank account to U.S. Gov
    Video About H.R. 3200 Health Care Reform Bill - Obama Care links your bank account to U.S. Gov! | Encyclopedia.com

    ***********

    Hopefully by now you see what this is coming to. And before anyone discredits me look up the info in the Health Care Reform bill. And come back with quotes, That is if you can understand 1500 pages of jumbled up **** (Constitutional Clarity Please). This is running along nicely and people need to wake up. They will have to shoot me before they can stick a chip in me.

    Road Ahead: Healthcare & RFID
  2. #2  
    Ya, because the antiquated paper and per hospital system being used now is so great. Centralized medical records just make since. Who cares if it's RFID? Your fingerprints are intergated in your body as well and no one is freaking out about that.
  3.    #3  
    Its about the amount of control they would have over you. They could cut you off from your bank acount and society with a flip of a switch. And before you try to use big words we already have Centralized Medical Records. And if you are a doctor you already have access to that info, you are just a sheep in this world I do not expect for everyone to understand. But you are so blind I'm sure you don't realise we are all slaves. Do you even know who you pay your income tax to?
  4. #4  
    Just one more debunked 'death panel' type of lie - it earned a coveted "Pants on Fire" from PolitiFact: PolitiFact | Chain e-mail says those on public option will have to get microchip implant
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  5. #5  
    My wife is a Doctor and she is not aware of any comprehensive federal database with medical records of all American's. Perhaps she's not part of the cool kids club?

    As far as the feds cutting you off from your bank account.....they can already do that.

    Quote Originally Posted by mrgrim800 View Post
    Its about the amount of control they would have over you. They could cut you off from your bank acount and society with a flip of a switch. And before you try to use big words we already have Centralized Medical Records. And if you are a doctor you already have access to that info, you are just a sheep in this world I do not expect for everyone to understand. But you are so blind I'm sure you don't realise we are all slaves. Do you even know who you pay your income tax to?
  6.    #6  
    Honestly that link you just posted from Politifact did not quote anything out of the Healthcare reform, it was just some opinions typed up with no facts. I just gave you more than three quotes. I am open to new ideas but please if you want to change someones thoughts show them some proof.
  7. #7  
    I don't think anyone is going to implant a device in you with the sole purpose of tracking you.
    sounds like
    1) implants for things like pacemakers will get RFID (they all have serial numbers, this is just ensuring a more standardized way of tracking them non invasively, currently most implatable devices can be identified in one way or another, be it a proprietary reading machine, or via an x-ray, or other) basically the idea would be to standardize the way we ensure implanted devices function properly over time, and study that function. as well as make it easier for a random emergency room or doctors office to identify specifically which device they are dealing with.

    2) that, inorder to cut the innordinate cost associated with the disparate systems of payment and information storage that is the timewasting money sink of an anti-competitive anti-consumer anti-public health research trainwreck that is modern medical billing and record keeping. we make sure patients have a card that ensures that the correct information and insurance follows them.

    honestly the billing/insurance/mecial paperwork is a major impediment to patient care, and a huge source of obfuscation and confusion both for patients and providers. it needs to be addressed, this is just one way of starting to do that, is it the right way, I don't know, and I am highly suspicious of anyone who would say they do know the correct answer with any degree of certainty. t

    here are real privacy concerns, and real lives to be saved, how to do this is not something a legislature will figure out in the next decade, let alone the first bill.
    There are four lights.
  8.    #8  
    Ryleyinstl we are both right, yea she does not have access she hasn't payed her cool kids book club membership fee. But really with the Patriot Act, The government can look up your medical info within a matter of seconds. Just cause she dousn't have access dousn't mean its not there.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by mrgrim800 View Post
    Ryleyinstl we are both right, yea she does not have access she hasn't payed her cool kids book club membership fee. But really with the Patriot Act, The government can look up your medical info within a matter of seconds. Just cause she dousn't have access dousn't mean its not there.
    if you think you can get anyones medical records in seconds your grossly misinformed. you simply cannot. you could request them, and then they would be processed, and then in some instances someone at a warehouse would have to pull them out, copy them, and fax them too you.

    but before any of that you would actually have to know where the patient was treated, and/or who has been insuring them, and, if they changed insurance in the past few years, that insurance companies name as well.

    you cannot just call some center that knows where everyone has been treated in the US because it dosn't exist, yet.
    There are four lights.
  10. #10  
    In the USA (other countries have accomplished this) the chances of ALL your medical records being electronic and on a computer system with Internet access is basically zero.

    My wife works at one of the best hospitals in the USA (supposedly) and they just accomplished this 5 years ago...and at that any history over 5 years old requires a trip to the paper files.

    I doubt the Patriot Act contained provisions for "magical wireless OCR."

    Quote Originally Posted by mrgrim800 View Post
    Ryleyinstl we are both right, yea she does not have access she hasn't payed her cool kids book club membership fee. But really with the Patriot Act, The government can look up your medical info within a matter of seconds. Just cause she dousn't have access dousn't mean its not there.
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by mrgrim800 View Post
    Honestly that link you just posted from Politifact did not quote anything out of the Healthcare reform, it was just some opinions typed up with no facts. I just gave you more than three quotes. I am open to new ideas but please if you want to change someones thoughts show them some proof.
    Seems pretty clear to me. It's a lie. Just as was said, it's words pulled out of context. Between killing grandma and implanting chips in your head, it's remarkable that the paranoid right hasn't completely lost it's base....but then again, that's probably not surprising. Fearmongering....pathetic.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    In the USA (other countries have accomplished this) the chances of ALL your medical records being electronic and on a computer system with Internet access is basically zero.

    My wife works at one of the best hospitals in the USA (supposedly) and they just accomplished this 5 years ago...and at that any history over 5 years old requires a trip to the paper files.
    Yep....and that's why computerized medical records (or access to them promptly) could save literally millions of dollars in tests that don't need to be done because they've already been done, or information regarding a patient evaluation that is unnecessary. Everyone in health care knows that. It's a key to lowering costs. And that's why that profound progressive, Newt Gingrich, has been pushing for this kind of system for a number of years now.

    That old lefty Newt
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    In the USA (other countries have accomplished this) the chances of ALL your medical records being electronic and on a computer system with Internet access is basically zero.
    I don't think the OP's concerns are illigitimate, there is a very real chance that the majority of americans will have there health records stored in some form on a computer with internet access. this may not be a central-standardized and comprehensive database, but it dosn't have to be to do damage. on the state level such systems already exist, and the problems have already started.

    Security Fix - Hackers Break Into Virginia Health Professions Database, Demand Ransom


    I feel strongly that a more robust and organized electronic medical records system with ordering capabilitys and the ability to track public health trends, and trends for individual providers, would be a huge boon for both the quality of care, and decrease the cost over time. but there are real issues that we may not be able to completely remove, and may have to make a decision as to weather to accept them (hackers for example) or avoid EMR. no system is un hackable (or thief proof for that matter), and none are free from the potential of abuse by those who have power over them.
    There are four lights.
  14. #14  
    This kind of thing is only a new concern in the USA because the idea of it is so new.

    I grew up in Saskatchewan and they have had mandatory centralized electronic medical records for all residents since the early 90's (if not longer). Controlled and secured by the provincial government. Every citizen had a plastic card for identification (similar to a credit card). There have never been any security funmbles that I ever faced with that system.

    Quote Originally Posted by windzilla View Post
    I feel strongly that a more robust and organized electronic medical records system with ordering capabilitys and the ability to track public health trends, and trends for individual providers, would be a huge boon for both the quality of care, and decrease the cost over time. but there are real issues that we may not be able to completely remove, and may have to make a decision as to weather to accept them (hackers for example) or avoid EMR. no system is un hackable (or thief proof for that matter), and none are free from the potential of abuse by those who have power over them.
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by windzilla View Post
    I don't think the OP's concerns are illigitimate, there is a very real chance that the majority of americans will have there health records stored in some form on a computer with internet access. this may not be a central-standardized and comprehensive database, but it dosn't have to be to do damage. on the state level such systems already exist, and the problems have already started.

    Security Fix - Hackers Break Into Virginia Health Professions Database, Demand Ransom


    I feel strongly that a more robust and organized electronic medical records system with ordering capabilitys and the ability to track public health trends, and trends for individual providers, would be a huge boon for both the quality of care, and decrease the cost over time. but there are real issues that we may not be able to completely remove, and may have to make a decision as to weather to accept them (hackers for example) or avoid EMR. no system is un hackable (or thief proof for that matter), and none are free from the potential of abuse by those who have power over them.
    Well, that's a little more rational. The vast majority of hospitals have computerized medical records right now. These are accessible via the web right now. Every person who has health insurance, whether public or private, has their medical information in the possession of not only their doctor, but also their hospital and their insurance company. All of this info is available online. But it's not organized, and it's not complete, and it's not available to someone who needs it in an emergency. If you hit your head while skiing in Vermont, and you happen to be with your girlfriend, who knows your medical history? Who even knows what meds you're taking? Do you think it might be important for the neurosurgeon to know you have congenital bleeding tendencies before he operates on you? This is a way to improve the quality of care and lower costs, both dramatically according to those who know these things....like Newt Gingrich, of all people who has been working on health care informational technology for a number of years now. Yes, security is important. Yes, there will always be ways for hackers to make things complicated, as they do for the military. But the benefits almost certainly outweigh the risks. Unless, of course, you're a paranoid member of a teabagging group.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    This kind of thing is only a new concern in the USA because the idea of it is so new.
    That's true about everything having to do with US health care reform...not just medical records. Between the avoidance of any change for the better and the desire to see Obama fail at any costs, this country is being led by selfish political hacks on the right, and whimpering idealists on the left. Consequently, we will get nothing of substance.
  17. #17  
    i agree it is scary because it is new.

    however here in the us there have already been fumbles, as illustrated by the link in my prior post, and thus it is not only a potential concern, but a real and present one.

    as i stated before, i think EMR is important. I also think that it raises new issues in the protection of patient privacy. the OP may be displaced in the specifics of their concern, but, the over-all concern is real, though dwarfed by the benefits IMHO.
    There are four lights.
  18. #18  
    Could not agree more but then I'm jaded due to my Canadian upbringing. I love the USA but heath care here is a complete cluster you know what.

    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    That's true about everything having to do with US health care reform...not just medical records. Between the avoidance of any change for the better and the desire to see Obama fail at any costs, this country is being led by selfish political hacks on the right, and whimpering idealists on the left. Consequently, we will get nothing of substance.
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Well, that's a little more rational. The vast majority of hospitals have computerized medical records right now. These are accessible via the web right now. Every person who has health insurance, whether public or private, has their medical information in the possession of not only their doctor, but also their hospital and their insurance company. All of this info is available online. But it's not organized, and it's not complete, and it's not available to someone who needs it in an emergency. If you hit your head while skiing in Vermont, and you happen to be with your girlfriend, who knows your medical history? Who even knows what meds you're taking? Do you think it might be important for the neurosurgeon to know you have congenital bleeding tendencies before he operates on you? This is a way to improve the quality of care and lower costs, both dramatically according to those who know these things....like Newt Gingrich, of all people who has been working on health care informational technology for a number of years now. Yes, security is important. Yes, there will always be ways for hackers to make things complicated, as they do for the military. But the benefits almost certainly outweigh the risks. Unless, of course, you're a paranoid member of a teabagging group.
    as someone who has made urgent calls to hospitals in Vermont requesting information on a patient before undergoing surgery for trauma in MA, I am very familiar with the benefits.

    i have done the same for other places as well. one more day to day function that people don't realize with EMR is the ability of your primary care physician to know what happened to you in the hospital, and follow you appropriately when you get out.

    thats just one tiny little thing.

    OTHO there needs to be a foundation in privacy and security laid out, before we build any EMR on it.

    I have also worked in the half EMR/paper perpetual transition places, spent many entire afternoons hunting down and ensuring a lab that was incorrectly ordered when translated from paper to electronic, is correctly performed.

    there are growing pains to this, and frankly I think the whole process is fascinating.

    in some areas EMR could be a magical pill to fix several problems, (or at least standardize their creation so that they can be dealt with more predictably)

    in other areas, it creates new ways for people to abuse the system. I don't quite trust the government to police itself, I do trust people to police their government, in effect that is the concern of the OP. I don't think the specifics are of much concern, however the checks and balances, and the limits on what can be done, and who can do it, with that information is a very legitimate concern.
    There are four lights.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by ryleyinstl View Post
    Could not agree more but then I'm jaded due to my Canadian upbringing. I love the USA but heath care here is a complete cluster you know what.

    LOL!

    i was writing in one of my responses about how the actual system itself, is a huge obfuscating, complicating anti-patient anti-provider and even anti-consumer thing that you were saying. I decided not to post it, but hey when in Rome.
    There are four lights.
Page 1 of 7 123456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions