There's an email being sent to out, a chain letter:
"Are you ready to have your RFID Chip Implanted? 3/23/2013 is your date!"
its even found here:
Obamacare Micro Chip Implant Coming March 23, 2013
Friday, February 8, 2013 6:50
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/02/obamacare-micro-chip-implant-coming-march-23-2013-2559218.html
I have already covered this before, so while digging online to update my research, I found an interesting break down of the truth on this.
I've cleaned up his article, to make it readable.
===========
Debunked: Obamacare RFID Chip Implant Law Hoax
There's a hoax going around that the health care reform act HR3200 (The Affordable Care Act, aka "Obamacare") requires everyone to get a chip implanted in their body.
The bottom line is:
The proposed law did not require anyone to get anything implanted
It just created a national registry of a huge of range of medical devices from pacemakers to dental implants
The intent of the registry was to collect statistics on how safe and effective the devices are
HR3200 is not the bill that passed. That's HR 3590, which does not have the registry.
An implantable RFID chip is just one example of a class II implantable medical device. Others include:
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1681045-overview
percutaneous catheters
vascular graft prostheses
bone-conduction hearing aids
tympanostomy tubes
gastrointestinal tubes
implantable staples
long-term intravascular catheters
intracranial pressure monitor devices
peripheral nerve stimulators for pain relief
eye sphere implants
intramedullary fixation rods
joint prostheses
Here's the original bill (which did not ever become law):
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3200ih/pdf/BILLS-111hr3200ih.pdf
And here's what it says:
SEC. 2521. NATIONAL MEDICAL DEVICE REGISTRY.
[...]
‘‘(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; and
‘‘(B) is—
‘‘(i) a class III device; or
‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining
There's a little more about administrative things, but the above is the entirety of what the conspiracy promoters base their theory on. They get away with it in part because the language of the bill is rather complex and difficult to read, so they can basically make up whatever interpretation they like, and many of their readers will be fooled.
They then build upon this by claiming that a Class II device is a
"implantable radiofrequency transponder system for patient identification and health information."
When actually the three classes of medical devices have nothing to do with what the devices are, but are to do with how much they are regulated to ensure safety. For example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_device#United_States
Examples of Class III devices include implantable pacemaker, pulse generators, HIV diagnostic tests, automated external defibrillators, and endosseous implants.
Examples of Class II devices include powered wheelchairs, infusion pumps, and surgical drapes.
Examples of Class I devices include elastic bandages, examination gloves, and hand-held surgical instruments.
So the law simply creates a registry for this HUGE range of different medical devices.
Implantable RFID chips would be covered under the law, but that's simply because they are one of thousands of devices that are classified as Type III or Type II implantable.
It's not a law, and even if it was, it no more mandates you get a chip implanted than it mandates you get a hip replacement.
This has also been quite well debunked over on Snopes:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/microchip.asp
====
I found this guys break-down here:
http://metabunk.org/threads/497-Debunked-Obamacare-RFID-Chip-Implant-Law-Hoax
========================= my research is found below
Health care reform in the United States
"Health care reform in the United States has a long history. This article covers two federal statutes enacted in 2010: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), signed March 23, 2010,[1][2] and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (H.R. 4872), which amended the PPACA and became law on March 30."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform_in_the_United_States
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Senate bill - H.R. 3590)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr3590eas/pdf/BILLS-111hr3590eas.pdf
Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (H.R. 4872)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr4872rh/pdf/BILLS-111hr4872rh.pdf
The only thing in this bill that is going to break this nation, is that fact that you will have to obtain some form of health insurance.
========
The Latest Healthcare Rumor: Microchip Implants
September 8, 2009 - by Donny Shaw
There’s a new rumor going around about the Democrats’ healthcare bill that’s so absurd and off-base that I hesitate to even bring it up here in order to debunk it. The rumor, which is being spread mostly in online forums and hasn’t yet received any kind of validation from a national political figure, is that the bill would require all Americans to get a microchip embedded in their body so the government can track them.
Or, at least, I think that’s what they are claiming. I’ve seen a few variations, including claims that everyone would need to get the microchips, only people who enroll in the public option would have to get it, and that the bill doesn’t require the implants, but it leaves it open to the government to decide after it is passed if they want to require them. You can view forum threads on the topic here, here, here and here, for examples. The rumor first came to my attention when someone wrote into the OpenCongress Facebook group asking for information on it.
The portion of text people have been referencing to support their claims can be read here, in Title V, Subtitle C – “National Medical Device Registry.” If you read the actual bill text, it’s very clear that this microchip rumor is just completely made up.
What this section of the bill actually does is call on the Secretary of Health and Human Services to “establish a national medical device registry to facilitate analysis of post-market safety and outcomes data” on all Class III medical devices and all “implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining” Class II medical devices that have been used on a patient. In other words, it establishes a registry designed to gather data on the effectiveness and safety of the most highly-regulated medical devices.
more here:
http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/1202-The-Latest-Healthcare-Rumor-Microchip-Implants
=========
Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff - Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Implantable Radiofrequency Transponder System for Patient Identification and Health Information
Document issued on: December 10, 2004
http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm072141.htm
=========
Health Law Myths: Outside The Realm Of Reality
by Julie Rovner
September 3, 2010
With a law as long and as complex as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, it's natural people are still a little confused about what it does and doesn't do. But some things being said or circulated on the Internet about the health law are well outside the realm of reality.
It turns out, though, that many of these more outlandish claims have at least some basis in truth. Here are some of the more popular myths about the law and the fact that gave rise to them.
The law requires people who want public health insurance to be implanted with a microchip.
The law creates a new "private army" for President Obama.
The law requires the hiring of 16,500 new, armed Internal Revenue Service Agents.
The law requires you to begin to paying taxes on your health insurance next year.
The law dictates what you can and can't eat.
The law requires hospitals to fire obese employees.
the rumors and other non-sense, here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129581493
=========
Learn if a Medical Device Has Been Cleared by FDA for Marketing
Before you begin researching the status of a medical device, you should first know some general information that will assist you in your search.
The Medical Device Amendments of 1976 to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act established three regulatory classes for medical devices. The three classes are based on the degree of control necessary to assure the various types of devices are safe and effective.
Class I – These devices present minimal potential for harm to the user and are often simpler in design than Class II or Class III devices. Examples include enema kits and elastic bandages. 47% of medical devices fall under this category and 95% of these are exempt from the regulatory process.
Class II – Most medical devices are considered Class II devices. Examples of Class II devices include powered wheelchairs and some pregnancy test kits. 43% of medical devices fall under this category.
----> Class III – These devices usually sustain or support life, are implanted, or present potential unreasonable risk of illness or injury. Examples of Class III devices include implantable pacemakers and breast implants. 10% of medical devices fall under this category.
Exempt – If a device falls into a generic category of exempted Class I devices, a premarket notification application and FDA clearance is not required before marketing the device in the U.S. However, the manufacturer is required to register their establishment and list their generic product with FDA. Examples of exempt devices are manual stethoscopes, mercury thermometers and bedpans.
http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/resourcesforyou/consumers/ucm142523.htm
========
U.S. Health Reform Plan Does Not Call for RFID Tracking
Posted By Mark Roberti, 12.08.2009
I did a search for "Sub Title C-11 Sec:2521" on Google, and found many posts essentially saying the same thing. I also found the text of both the House bill and the Senate bill, and there is no "Sub Title C-11 Sec:2521."
There is, however, a section on a national medical device registry (Sub Title C, Section 2561), which reads:
"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; and (b) is...a device that is implantable, life supporting or life-sustaining."
So basically, the bill put forth by the U.S. House of Representatives wants to track the results of these devices and link them to a registry so a doctor looking to implant a device in a patient can check whether it actually worked in previous patients who received the device. There is no mention of RFID, and no mention of tracking individuals who receive the device.
more here:
http://www.rfidjournal.com/blog/entry/7258
========
in other news....
======================================
Britain passes law requiring that dogs get microchips by 2016
Adario StrangeThursday, February 7, 2013 - 12:24pm
In the U.S., inserting a microchip into your beloved pet as a means to keep track of it is still viewed as something of a luxury usually employed by only the most devoted pet owners. But now a new law in the U.K. will make the practice of chipping your dog a requirement by 2016.
The U.K.-government initiative came about as a means to control the exploding number of stray dogs on the nation's streets, which number somewhere in the range of 110,000. According to the government's figures, roughly 60 percent of the nation's pet dogs are already carrying chip implants. The chip, which is about the size of a grain of rice, is generally implanted somewhere on the back of the neck or between the shoulders of the pet and files the animal in a national database.
After the new law goes into effect, pet owners who don't chip and register their dogs will face the possibility of a fine of up to $785. Interestingly, the law even accounts for possible changes in pet ownership by requiring that the chip's registration details be changed to reflect the new owner's details upon transfer, essentially making owning a pet in the U.K. akin to owning a car.
Of course, some view these new chipping rules as a precursor to the eventual mandatory chipping of humans at birth, and just last year an email hoax spread throughout the U.S. promoting the false notion that Obamacare somehow included mandatory chipping of humans.
Despite the seemingly outlandish nature of such urban myths, as microchip implants become ever more useful, it's worth considering what a future in which similar chipping laws for humans are mandatory, or perhaps even popular and voluntary, might look like. DARPA has already revealed plans to implant soldiers with diagnostic nanochip implants.
more here:
http://www.dvice.com/2013-2-7/britain-passes-law-requiring-dogs-get-microchips-2016
source:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/feb/06/dogs-england-microchipped-2016
================
Why did I send this out?
Because I've seen over the past few years, a lot of misinformation making it into our church.
No way I'm sitting quite on this one.
I mean really.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.