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 ...
Just wrap the pill in tin foil...voila!
The dude totally dismisses the reasons the technology is being developed. Probably because he is biased and has an agenda.
OK, I agree with everything you wrote. I just think you are not applying it to my points.
If you let your kids drive the new car, you tell them your conditions and rules and expectations. You can do this because you own the car, you are paying for it, your pay the insurance, AND you are the parent. YOU may decide to put a GPS tracking deice in the car or the kids’ phones or you may not. But you have the right to do that, morally and ethically.
IF, on the other hand your child bought their own car, pays their own insurance, passed their 18th birthday, has their own apartment (you get the idea) they CAN do and go where they want to in that car, even if it is against your wishes and guidance.
Now, shifting that to healthcare ...
You can make your kids take their meds. You can make them eat well. You can chase them off the X-box and push out the back door to play. Once they are adults they ARE at liberty to do what they please.
But are they at liberty to do what they please in ways that adds cost to YOUR LIFE, and the lives of your neighbors?
by way of analogy, explore the ethics here for a moment.
A child is diagnosed with leukemia. The parents are christian scientists or animists or whatever and refuse treatment. Is it right or wrong for the ‘state’ to enforce chemotherapy? Similarly, a child has appendicitis. Untreated that child will likely die. Again, is it right to REQUIRE that child to be treated, even if it is against the will of the child or the child’s parents?
So, if we have people (of majority age now) how injure themselves and add a burden to society by not taking care of themselves and ending up critically ill, perhaps repeatedly, ... and adding REAL COST to others’ lives by driving up the costs of healthcare overall ... are they at liberty to do that? If you have a fat lazy slob next door who has a ‘free’ scooter for trips to WalMart, drinks too much and smokes, eats junk, has an oxygen tank and a one pint bag of prescription pills provided ‘free,’ and gets picked up once a month by the ‘free’ medical transportation service scam ... wouldn’t it be nice if they truly shared in the responsibility for their health AND complied with their course of care? IF they can get all this for ‘free’ don’t you wish there were some strings of responsibility and compliance attached?
Part of me says HELL YEAH! But the libertarian in me says NOW WAY.
I DO NOT want the gummint to be an insurer. I do not want the gummint to act as my health care provider. But part of me sees a value in getting high risk people to do a better job of complying, even if they don’t want to.
I think with the new Fed Medical system people will be lucky to just get any medication at all let alone have a very expensive electronic medical surveillance device attached to every patient in the country.
With the new 3rd world economy and infrastructure about to settle on this country, I don't see the feasibility of justifying the national distribution of these devices for standard use.
Agreed. Insurance is a substitute for liquid cash on hand ready to cover risks.
Few folks have the cash to cover the risk of losing their house to fire/storm or their health to catastrophic illness.
We ought to be able to cover others risks out of investments. But that is easier said than done.
I see it as one of consent when it comes to the technology.
Suppose I have a problem with irregular heart rhythms. I agree to have a pacemaker installed. Let’s suppose the ‘newest’ models are bluetooth enabled and once a day or continuously upload telemetry to my cardiologist. Because the doc has this info, he can improve my course of care.
I am OK with that, as long as I said it’s OK to implant said device.
The ISSUE comes in when the FEDS *MANDATE* that I MUST have that device implanted and I *MUST* upload data. IF I don;t have a choice, THAT is a problem.
A tougher one is when Kaiser or BlueCross says “if we are going to continue to cover you for your tachycardia, you need to have the model 1500 implanted and comply with the upload requirements.” hmmm tougher choice.
Anyway, thanks for participating in the ‘debate’.
Most people equate business with the market. In fact there’s a difference:
Tea partiers: market friendly, big biz hostile
real republicans: market friendly, big biz friendly
Democrats: big biz friendly, market hostile
Big pharma embraces libs cuz they lock them in as permanent players; in this way they have less to fear from new disruptive technologies and entrepreneurs. This also lessens the boom/bust cycle. So in short pharma becomes an extension of the US gov’t.
But what if they hear you mention you support the “tea party” and they send a malfunction code to your pacemaker? /sarc (well half sarc anyway)
Well I certainly agree with the government intrusion part.
And in a vacuum, if the information was strictly between your Dr. and yourself and your permission was given, then we are in agreement. [altho my Dr. seems to be so busy that if a prescription lapses, its takes several attempts to reinstate it. How would he ever keep up with “monitoring” my everyday care?]
Problem is that it won’t be in a vacuum. Its not going to be one on one with your Dr. It will be shared and it will be required to be reported to some database in DC or wherever.
They are demanding that identifiable info be reported for “research purposes”! What??? Thats somewhere in the massive cramdown...I don’t have the chapter and verse but it is there. A carved out exception to your supposed “rights” under HIPPA [which only keeps YOUR relatives from knowing your conditions...there are so many exceptions that any bureaucrat can get the info they want.]
Now someone wants to “monitor” if I’ve taken my drugs?
Absolutely NOT.
I don’t have alzheimers and I’m not in a mental ward somewhere. I don’t need a mommy, a daddy or a nanny.
I think we agree on that.
The defect in your reasoning is that Obamacare is forced upon you by the government. You must comply or face punishment. It isn't a voluntary contract with mutually beneficial characteristics. It is blackmail on pain of lost of liberty and property.
Yeah...and pretty soon the ONLY place you’ll be able to GET any meds is BIG BROTHER!
Over the age of 50...YOU will be considered “high risk” for ANYTHING....
You’re not sticking a transmitter down my throat.
What’s the next step?
...and there would be a next step, there always is.
Given your logic, it would be prudent to stick transmitters into ALL foods which are high in cholesterol. Then if YOU eat any of those high cholesterol foods, you’d get a visit from the high cholesterol food police. After all, your behavior would be increasing the cost of my premiums - right? NO Twinkies for you, Bud.
Oh and YOU need to exercise too. Perhaps there should be a transmitter implanted in your body that connects up to your treadmill. Didn’t feel like walking 3 miles on the treadmill today? Too bad, you’re raising MY premiums...the exercise police are on their way.
I find the above to be REASONABLE requests of you. I don’t want you eating a piece of cake or slacking off on your level of exercise and increasing my premiums.
In fact, I want you to swallow one more transmitter every day. Regular bowel movements are an important part of daily living health and wellness. Please take this pill every morning, so we can monitor what time you take your daily doody. Uh oh....no elimination today? How unlucky for you, the doody police are on their way.
agree completely. Thus my point that the ‘gummint’ is the one institution I wold NOT trust to do this.
“I see that as analogous to wearing a seat belt EVERY TIME I get in the car.”
I don’t and never will!
My PU was built before the seat belt law and I don’t have to install or weare one!
Well said.
And as you point out, HIPAA ‘security’ is a joke. Your privacy is an illusion.
The bottom line for me on this is as you suggest — if it’s between me and my doc, and perhaps even me and my healthcare insurer, I could go with this. Perhaps not for me right now, but I wish I could know that my 88 year old parents are taking the right meds, staying hydrated etc. I can;t be with them every day, and this would help us and them.
BUT the gummint needs to back off on this and other mandates.
I completely agree with your point; thus my repeated attempts to emphasize that the gummint is the one institution not to trust in this role.
I should have emphasized that more.
As you state, Obamacare does not give us the choice on our healthcare (except an abortion ...)
Statistically, that is correct ;-)
My ‘logic’ requires CONSENT not a mandate.
The issue I raised was who if anyone can be forced to:
(1) fill out periodic paperwork to get meds
(2) report foods/liquids eaten
(3) take drug A but not drug B
(4) do ‘this’ or lose benefits
and so on, with the point being that THAT goes on today. This is just one more level of intrusion.
I am NOT for this as a government mandate. I AM for this in certain high risk or ICU in-patient scenarios.
I am not for serial incremental erosion of our liberties.
But SHOULD ‘we’ do anything about the non-productive fat slob who lives next door sucking up expensive health care benefits, and doing NOTHING to maintain their health?
THAT is the ethical and societal issue I was trying to get at.
Remember, I am not in favor of the government requiring anyone to swallow a pill with an RFID tag without their consent.
Recall that liberals wanted Brady background check info retained for research purposes as well.
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.