kelsey hudson wrote:
Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade wrote:
Granted, a limited amount of information can be present on engraved
medical bracelets, but how much of your medical history do you want
engraved on metal and wrapped around your wrist?
Also, you'd be screwed if the 'Net were having issues, or the power
was out.
I'd simply like to point out that _I_ would like any doctor that needs
to treat me to have access to my medical history, but I agree in that
having it in an online form presents too much risk.
I know this has been proposed before, but what if they did something
like they do with dogs and cats: implant it subcutaneously at the back
of the neck in a small RFID tag.
Yes, the drawbacks to such a system are equally as immense (can you
imagine someone setting up an rfid detector at the door of your grocery
store, for instance, and snarfing *everyone's* medical records as they
walk through? What about if this same someone set up these detectors at
a bunch of different stores/places of business and used it to track you?
). Good Idea? Sure, but it's also a Bad Idea! Built-in ID is a
double-edged sword ... it'd be nice if they could find a way to
fool-proof it, though. Problem is, as soon as something's fool-proofed,
along comes a better fool :(
-Kelsey
If it's a medical record where others may have access to it, then it's
regulated. If some (more than three?) states implement it, then it's
regulated by the Feds. Great! You've just justified a national ID (Mark
of the Beast? LOL) system.
How long do you think it will take to have other types of information
attached to such a tag?
Maybe that tag makes sure you don't get admitted to a hospital based on
<insert_how_you're_different_from_the_rest_of_us>.
--
Best Regards,
~DJA.
(Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence.)
Yet sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
--pegr
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
