Posted on 04/27/2010 6:30:56 AM PDT by Scythian
(NaturalNews)
Now that the U.S. government has achieved its monopoly over health care, new technologies are in the works that will allow the government to remotely monitor and track whether ordinary citizens are complying with taking medications prescribed by conventional doctors. One new technology described at the U.S. Senate Committee on Aging allows "pills to be electronically outfitted with transmitters" which would track the patient's compliance with medications and broadcast that information back to government health care enforcers who check for "compliance and efficacy."
"Emerging technologies allow pills to be electronically outfitted with transmitters to communicate with the user's wristwatch that shows that the pill has been consumed," said University of Virginia professor Robin Felder at the committee meeting. "Broadband connectivity of these devices would allow the electronic medical record to be updated with regard to medication compliance and efficacy."
This would allow government health operators, for example, to know whether you've taken all your prescribed psychiatric medications. If you veer from the course of pharmaceuticals prescribed by your doctor, health care enforcement agents could be dispatched to your door to make sure you start taking your pills.
Parents who currently attempt to protect their children from toxic medical therapies such as chemotherapy could be closely monitored by government medical enforcement agents. If you try to flush dangerous pharmaceuticals down the toilet instead of actually taking them, the lack of an electronic tracking signal will let your health care observers know you didn't really take the pills.
Click the link on the main post for the entire story or click here http://www.naturalnews.com/028663_health_care_technology.html
(Excerpt) Read more at naturalnews.com ...
Seems to me when you go in for your required 6 month revist to the doc who does a blood test and your levels are not down, he would ask three questions: are you following your diet, are you exercising, are you taking your medication. If you respond no, that is the point where a report should be made if one is to be made at all. Having someone following me around with a satilite tracking stations to determine whether I am doing what I am supposed to do is beyond the pale IMO. What is next, wearing a bracelet with your locator so if the government wants to find you they just punch in your locator code? No, I think the present day Nazis have enough power over our lives, they don’t need any more...I am not an ant working in an ant colony responding to chemical stimuli der leader.
Thank you for your thoughtful, reasonable and principled reply ;-)
The mentality behind this is the #1 thing we have to worry about. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I wish we would hang them humanely with a good quality, reusable rope. Any technology that can be used to manipulate violent crazies can be used to manipulate you, 2A or no.
That business is going to stop soon. We're going to monitor you or even administer you meds remotely and make sure that you won't make any more mistakes.
Gentlemen, we can rebuild her. We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's first obedient woman. ExTexasRedhead will be that woman. We can make her better than she was before. Better, quieter, fully medicated.
You are welcome.
Your position is wrong on so many levels, it was the most appropriate response.
Nice insult, but you miss my point. (bear in mind that I would NOT agree to such compliance methods being enforced for ambulatory anitbiotics or statins or analgesics, but MIGHT consider them to be a good idea for very high risk chronic care patients.)
**IF** you agree to health INSURANCE coverage, then your insurer has a (arguable) right to ascertain if you are behaving in ways commensurate with the risk they agreed to cover. For example, again, your health insurance premiums are lower IF you are indeed a non-smoker. An INSURANCE company that you MUTUALLY contract with has a right to ‘know’ that you are behaving in expected or promised ways. IF you don’t like it (their terms) then you have the right to not contract with that insurer.
I agree that we are not chattels of the state, and careful reading of my post would reveal I do not sponsor OR spin that idea.
**IF** the gummint were to become our ‘insurer’ and then require us to participate according to its terms AND ALSO implement this RFID tagging scheme, then I as well WOULD have a real problem with it.
But please take a moment to consider two practical upsides —
(1) in a hospital environment, such medical tagging can help make certain your sick family member received the right medicine, the right dose, at the right time.
(2) in a chronic care environment for your eldery grandmother you can have peace of mind knowing she is taking her meds that maintain her quality of life, AND also know of AEs (adverse reactions/events) in time to heal her.
My point is that WITH CONSENT there IS a place for this technology. Sure it can be used for evil, but don’t over react.
There is a similiar article on CNSNews.
It includes reference to e-Health or e-Care which “will allow doctors to interact with their patients through innovations such as video chats, telephone health checkups, and home-health monitoring devices that relay data over wireless Internet connections”:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/64663
Thanks for the reasoned reply. Remembering that I am only advocating this for certain patients at high risk. Using the same straw man of an elderly, obese, hypertensive, COPD, Type-2 diabetic patient ... 6 months is too long. Real time tracking is technically possible but at huge cost (ie in-patient monitoring). FOR THE RIGHT HIGH-RISK patient, daily monitoring has a real value to the patient and the people covering the costs (family and insurer). It also adds peace of mind.
The technology is as simple as an RFID tag in the ‘pill’. The dreaded tracker could count the pills in the bottle on a daily basis and also have a pretty good guess that one or more was in your body.
I DO NOT like the gummint having a role in this, cuz I DO NOT TRUST them with the data, or with their intent.
See link at posr #30
You cannot maintain a culture of freedom when corporations have ‘rights’ to anything.
You cannot maintain a culture of freedom when you make exceptions to the very foundation of freedom, that YOU own your body, not your government, not your hospital, not any corporation, nor any socialist ‘do gooders’. There is no moral, monetary, or ethical justification to claim that any of these entities own your body and not you.
When you break apart the most fundamental requirement for freedom, into, ‘well in this case the hospital can own your body’ you are destroying freedom. It cannot be preserved when people are willing to ‘compromise’ it.
OK. You’ve called BS and you’ve told me I am wrong in numerous ways.
So far your argument is without merit since it is devoid of substance. Although I do respect your position.
Please understand that I DO NOT want our gummint, particularly THIS FEDERAL gummint to get anywhere near this. They are untrustworthy and unethical and immoral.
I will just say one more time that (a) the technology has a place in the RIGHT patient care environment, and (b) an insurer covering your risks has the right to place conditions on your behavior when covering that risk. (you can fire them if you don’t like the conditions)
The moral and ethical concerns of giving the government this power are extremely troubling.
Can we be at peace now?
Of course we can be at peace.
I simply disagree that such technology has any place among sane individuals.
Accepting such a position allows the advancement of “monitoring for your own good”.
And i reject that.
So do you think the government has no right to imprison someone who has been convicted of a crime? If imprisonment is permissible, certainly trakcing medication compliance is permissible, as it involves much less restriction on the convict's freedom. And I presume you are also opposed to the death penalty, no matter how heinous the crime, and how overwhelming the evidence of who committed it?
The people can imprison criminals based on a jury of PEERS.
The ‘government’ bureaucrats cannot, if you interpret the Constitution as a document to protect freedom.
You are changing the subject however. Since corporations were allowed to own and run hospitals in the 1960s, the path to socialism and socialist control over us was set.
I need to take a hammer and pulverize every pill before I take it. It’s just this “thing” I have.
By the way good people, if Obamacare is implemented, cancel your living will by stapling a statement to it saying; “I want to live! Keep me alive! Spare no expense!, over your signature and a date.” This will bankrupt any health system very quickly.
That's why I hate insurance. It is a private form of collectivism that leads to public collectivism. I'd prefer to cover my own risks and reap my own benefits but now we will suffer under a new law that will enslave us all. As slaves, we might eat better, dress better, exercise more, be assigned a better job or mate and even enjoy life more.
I would take my own chances, reasonable or not.
This is insidious ... The death panels are materializing.
Pulverizing may work for a time, but then ...
Eugenics in a bottle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.