FDA Okays Implantable Chip for Health Care

You may have seen that the FDA gave its approval for the RFID implant that is supposed to house health-related information for the subject. The Chairman & CEO of the manufacturing company, Applied Digital Solutions, says that it hopes that FDA approval will help stop some some of "the creepy factor" with consumers.

While I'm glad that the FDA has found that the implant won't be rejected by the body, cause infection or otherwise generally bring about nasty side effects, it still gives me the heebie-jeebies.

Now, I don't think that Applied Digital is doing anything wrong here, nor do I think this is the "mark of the Beast" (as the article notes some people have labeled the implant). Their technology is interesting and as a larger principle, I'm pro-innovation.

What I worry about (in perhaps my own paranoic fits) is what might go wrong with these implants. I'd feel better knowing that these are error-proof; that is, that the chance of the barcode on these being modified by an outside source or internal glitch is near-zero. Also, what if something goes wrong with the scanning device? Or you're stuck in an area without this scanning device? What if, a la Dan Brown's Angels and Demons, people are mugged or worse for their implant? I know, it's a bit fantastic, and it's more likely that Mexico's Attorney General and his staff are more likely to be attacked for the implant that provides access to the drug cartel investigation rooms than the average Joe will be for the records showing he's had a mole removed, was given a prescription for athelete's foot and has an abcessed tooth, but these are the kind of worries that the public is coming up with and that need to be addressed by the company.

With the Decade of Health IT program underway, though, it does make me wonder what information will be stored on the computers and who will see it. The scanners might be able to read that 1III9ZG4HH7GVA2U is lying on the guerney, but what computer system will that be linked up to to be able to identify that person as MariJo Smithusala of Crescent Falls, ND? Will it really only be used if you're being seen by someone within your insurance plan? What if you're uninsured and only go to clinics when you can? How are those records going to be linked?

If it can be used in those awful cases where medical personnel can't know if you're allergic to penicillin or shouldn't receive some stabilizing med because its contraindicated with the meds you already take, that's great. But it may take a few years (or more) before this technology can really be implemented for widespread use (and many of the privacy issues will need to be ironed out before that happens).

Comments

[Jeff Donohue]

Doesn't a medic alert badge do much the same thing, except (i) it doesn't require a fancy reader device; (ii) it's unlikely to be rejected by the body (except for those folks who are allergic to the metals or plastics used in their manufacture); and (iii) it may not survive (or stay on the arm) in an extreme circumstance (e.g., accidents involving amputation)?

Is this a solution for a problem we don't really have?

Contrast this to something that I've thought would be useful: a LoJack like system for finding missing children or Alzheimers'/autism patients who wander. But there you need something that would broadcase quite far -- and a related power source which might be a tad big.

And if your Dan Brown concern materializes, I'm sure the various consumer protection lobbies will lobby the Beast for a limit on liablility (e.g., my debit and credit cards, which are limited to $50 absent my gross negligence or willful misconduct).