1984???

[oma]

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/24...n-FDA-Approval
Microchip-Laden Drugs Given FDA Approval

Digital Medicines are the same pharmaceuticals you take today, with one small change: each pill also contains a tiny sensor that can communicate, via our digital health feedback system, vital information about your medication-taking behaviors and how your body is responding.

I'm just wondering if these pills which contain chips could be forcefully given to patients, i.e. in prisons, psychotropic meds in mental hospitals, etc., anyone who doesn't want to take some medications in order to force compliance?

[gman863]

Originally Posted by oma

I'm just wondering if these pills which contain chips could be forcefully given to patients, i.e. in prisons, psychotropic meds in mental hospitals, etc., anyone who doesn't want to take some medications in order to force compliance?

Although I'm usually very liberal when it comes to not forcing things on people, I'm 100% for using microchip technology to force medication compliance on people who may be a danger to others.

In the case of the "Batman" movie shooting in Colorado, it has been revealed that the suspect's psychiatrist felt he was a danger to others months before the massacre. Had the suspect been forced into a treatment plan where it could be verified (by microchip) he was on his meds, about 70 people might be alive or uninjured today.

On a possibly less threatening note, one of my best friend's ex-husband has bipolar issues that are off the charts (that, and he's likely still having effects from the "bath salts" he got off of a few months ago). Although he has not been diagnosed as a danger to others (yet), he's made countless 911 calls while having hallucinations of strange people in his apartment. At least twice, I've had to drop what I was doing and rush to his apartment to talk him down and help avoid the cops hauling him off to either a mental hospital or jail.

We know from experience that - if he took his meds as prescribed - this type of s**t would not be happening. In this case, the benefits of using microchip medicine to make it easy for his case worker to spot issues before they blow up would far outweigh any civil liberties issues.

[sibeer]

Originally Posted by oma

I'm just wondering if these pills which contain chips could be forcefully given to patients, i.e. in prisons, psychotropic meds in mental hospitals, etc., anyone who doesn't want to take some medications in order to force compliance?

They're probably already forcing medication on these individuals anyway. If they want you sedated in a hurry it's a shot not a pill.

Would handy for my mother. She's on a few medications, and she has dementia. Could make sure she didn't forget.

[BlueFalconLoyd]

I'm a lifetime career professional in the Healthcare Information Technology/Management sector, and get the fortunate opportunity to see all the new Healthcare technologies by various companies (Epic, Allscripts, Cerner, Kodak, General Electric, McKesson, CareStream, etc) that is constantly coming out. Some of which are pretty freaking cool, and some of which...in the conspiracy theorists mind could be pretty freaking scary.

There's a huge push currently right now to have a Global Health Information Exchange(HIE), as well as continue to setup prerequisites for personalized medication. This was further helped by the road laying of the Bush Administration, and furthermore the implementation of the Obama Administration in what we now have coined "Obamacare". One part of this Healthcare Reform was that of the Accountability Care Act, and the subsidiary "Meaningful Use". This is currently demanding that Healthcare organizations transform their daily workflow into, the coming future, a fully electronic workflow that will allow all patients data to be held in an electronic format.

With this, comes the creation of the Health Information Exchange, a global (cloud) of all patient's healthcare records that will allow any patient to walk into a hospital, scan their card(or whatever is planned in the future to denote this information) and voila! the hospital now has the respected access to view information necessary to make diagnosis' on the patient's current illness or injury based upon previous visits to whatever hospital in whatever country they were admitted.

With this sort of information, a huge collection of past patient records that prior to making electronic could literally take days, or even weeks to obtain from a different hospital prior - we can start making considerable leaps into the personalized medication sector, which is what the OP is describing.

Taking all this information and throwing it into one large clump, having a computer analyze it, then dispensing a god-medication that is specific to YOU, the patient, is the end goal for medication. I'm all for this, much like all the rest of the technology we use consumers constantly strive to have technology, or options in technology, that specifically fit them. In the future, healthcare won't be much different to this.

PS - 1984 was my favorite book of all time :P

[Spad]

Originally Posted by gman863

Although I'm usually very liberal when it comes to not forcing things on people, I'm 100% for using microchip technology to force medication compliance on people who may be a danger to others . . .

While, in theory, that idea sounds logical . . . the idea of putting it into practice scares the hell out of me. One word you used is especially concerning: may.

May be a danger to others? May? Who makes that determination? There are literally millions and millions of poor souls who suffer from some some mental disease or other . . . but only a small percentage of those disorders represent a real danger to society; and even of those an even smaller percentage have actually harmed someone else. Call me old fashioned, but I have a hard time being ok with force-feeding medications to or "micro-chipping" someone who hasn't done anything wrong. Some psyche-meds have pretty serious side effects, after all . . . if they are wrongly or maliciously prescribed the effects can be very detrimental to a persons health, not to mention their mental well being.

It wasn't too long ago people were having their spouses falsely committed to asylums with the help of crooked doctors and psychiatrists, just to get hands on their spouse's money.

No - sorry . . . the danger and ramifications of abusing such a system far, far outweigh the benefits. There would have to be a foolproof way to prevent scamming such a system to get my support. Now, if someone wants to enroll in a medical information program like BlueFalconLoyd suggests, with a view for making things easier for themselves, then more power to them.

[oma]

In some instances it may be useful to have a person take those micro chipped pills. What could be the side-effects of this kind of pills, even though these chips are the size of a grain of salt? In addition, the interaction of these micro-chipped pills with the drug itself?

However, where would the line be drawn and by who?

I believe just like Spad that it could be wide open to abuse. For instance, one has to look at the history of psychiatry. Even nowadays they're pumping young children full with psychiatric drugs.

[BlueFalconLoyd]

Originally Posted by oma

In some instances it may be useful to have a person take those micro chipped pills. What could be the side-effects of this kind of pills, even though these chips are the size of a grain of salt? In addition, the interaction of these micro-chipped pills with the drug itself?

However, where would the line be drawn and by who?

I believe just like Spad that it could be wide open to abuse. For instance, one has to look at the history of psychiatry. Even nowadays they're pumping young children full with psychiatric drugs.

I believe this is being misinterpreted a bit. This "microchip" wouldn't stay in the body forever, it would end up being passed by the digestive system just like anything else you consume. Nanotechnology in medicine isn't something new, and within the next 10 years or so will be a very real thing I believe.

If you were to have a microchip placed inside of you, that were to stay there - your consent would need to be given - for the simple fact that there would be things that you could/couldn't do otherwise it would end up damaging it. Pacemakers are a great example of this, that we've been using for years. There isn't an uproar about them and they literally save people's lives. I guess, I'm just all for intertwining healthcare and technology -- more importantly intertwining technology in general with our daily lives. Things like 1984, government control, etc don't scare me. If someone in a seat of power would like to be able to watch me take my morning dump than so be it.