Wifi devices INSIDE the human body

[bamak93]

New wi-fi devices warn doctors of heart attacks - Times Online

The Bluetooth wireless technology that allows people to use a hands-free earpiece while making a mobile telephone call could soon alert the emergency services when someone has a heart attack, Ofcom predicts.

The communications regulator said that sensors could be implanted into people at risk of heart attack or diabetic collapse that would allow doctors to monitor them remotely.

If the “in-body network” recorded that the person had suddenly collapsed, it would send an alert, via a nearby base station at their home, to a surgery or hospital.

However, Ofcom also gave warning in its report, Tomorrow’s Wireless World, that the impact of such technology on personal privacy would require more debate.

Related Links
Honda robo-walker takes weight off your feet
Robot limb may prove handy for astronauts or the elderly
The technology, which is being tested now in Portsmouth, could also be used if a patient failed to take his or her medicines. A pill dispenser would send an automatic reminder and, if the pills were not taken within a certain time, an alarm would sound and a message would be sent to the patient’s family or carers.

However, health experts say that they are sceptical about the level of take-up of “in-body” sensors while research into the possible radiation impact of wi-fi networks is going on.

The Ofcom report also said that advances in GPS positioning and short-range wireless technologies could “revolutionise the way we conduct our journeys and safety levels on the roads”. Intelligent transport systems being developed by car manufacturers allowed cars to communicate with each other and send alerts about sudden braking. If a collision happened the car’s system could automatically call the emergency services. The technology could also apply the brakes automatically if it was determined that two cars were getting too close to each other.

Paramedics attending the scene of an accident would carry a small computer that would pick up wireless messages from a bracelet incorporated in the driver’s watch. These would enable them to gain access to information about his or her medical history.

The European Commission is discussing whether to allow the “e-Call” automatic emergency call-out, which could be on the market by 2011. A recent trial suggested that the technology could cut ten minutes off the time for the emergency services to reach the scene of an accident and a 15 per cent reduction in fatalities.

Ofcom said that drivers could be helped by further advances in sat-nav technology. Signals would alert drivers to congestion ahead and then calculate whether their proposed journey would be quicker by train.

Wireless communication technology could also enable food items to carry microchips containing information on their contents. This would allow, for example, nut allergy sufferers to be alerted if they inadvertently picked up an item containing nuts.

Ofcom concluded that wireless communication was now “integral to our lives”. It said that the Government must decide how to prepare for future demands on the radio frequencies, or spectrums, that wireless services use. Wireless congestion, with wi-fi users “piggybacking” on other people’s connections, must not result in interference in potentially life-saving communications, it added.

Peter Ingram, Ofcom’s chief technology officer, said: “This report demonstrates the many creative ways that the radio spectrum can be used for the benefit of citizens. But other bodies will have to decide whether the transfer of personal data, which these advances involve in the medical sphere, is appropriate for the benefits.”

Why Bluetooth?

Named after King Harald Bluetooth of Denmark and Norway, who unified warring tribes in the 3rd century. Bluetooth was likewise intended to unify different technologies.

Ummm, I'm all for saving lives and quick access to information, but:

THIS SEEMS LIKE A BAD IDEA.

While this would make heart attacks and genetic diseases easier to counteract and possibly cure, this leaves us open to many forms of attack.

I'm gonna reference Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots. Remember SOP(Sons of the Patriots)? Yeah, this is very similar in concept, but serves a radically different purpose. SOP ends up being used to transfer what are essentially digital heart attacks to throngs of soldiers.

And hey, what if terrorists get wind of this and manufacture digital AIDS? That won't be pretty.

I fully support a digital revolution, but this is almost as bad as cyborgs in my book. Machines should help humans, not be a part of them.

[Pelafina]

And even if no one attacks people like this, the concern of someone always knowing your whereabouts is quite disconcerting.

[bamak93]

Originally Posted by Morningstar

And even if no one attacks people like this, the concern of someone always knowing your whereabouts is quite disconcerting.

This is a very good point. GPS tracking of our movements would be a very seductive idea to the government.

I also forgot about the capabilities of controlling an individual. Since the body can handle small electrical impulses for brain functions, who's to say that they cannot send commands from our hearts to our brains? A government could have an infinite amount of control over it's citizens, and potentially lead to wars on a massive scale.

[Pelafina]

Originally Posted by Mickxey

A government could have an infinite amount of control over it's citizens, and potentially lead to wars on a massive scale.

I think I'm going to write a book about this.

[Square Ninja]

Play Deus Ex. Relevance and whatnot.

...but yeah, this is only going to lead to more measures of control over the individual. I like the idea of being able to fight off diseases and such, but it sets a dangerous precedence.

[bamak93]

Originally Posted by Square Ninja

Play Deus Ex. Relevance and whatnot.

...but yeah, this is only going to lead to more measures of control over the individual. I like the idea of being able to fight off diseases and such, but it sets a dangerous precedence.

Exactly.

I don't want hospitals (or the government) to have ANY control over me.

[Akans]

Mmm... personally, I think that technology really isn't that far to monitor every movement of every person in the world. Sure its all advanced and stuff, but this thing is really not possible right now so that a small computer inside you can manipulate your thoughts...

Sure its possible in the future, and in theory, but no worries right now.

[Devious]

I find this all to be a mere conspiracy. Controlling people through the heart monitors? Do you know how complex the human brain is? It would take decades of study to find a proper way to transfer electronic charges with recorded actions to the vast amounts of limbs in the body. Every joint, every muscle, every bone would all have to be moved with a sequence that is purely electrical. Something a human cannot control outside of their own body. Also, in order for this to even be possible one must implant something in the brain. You cannot control the brain from the heart. The brain controls the heart through passive electrical impulses that cause it to process blood.

As for the fear of monitoring a human through GPS. That allows for the possibility of crime control. Alibis are easy to manipulate through word of mouth, but not when there's a monitor on you at all times. This GPS system wouldn't give the government capability to see and hear what the monitored individual is doing or saying. It would only allow for position monitoring.

You view it as if the government is some menacing figure that pulls puppet strings. The government runs this country and upholds the economy while people live their lives the way they see fit. Don't get me wrong, I want Bush out as much as anyone, but most people blame the entire government for national issues rather than blaming sects of the government (I.E. Congress for Legislative complaints, the Two-Party system that runs the political world and often ruins the capability for a truly good president, and the list extends) that are truly responsible for issues.

More people die from lack of treatment than they do with treatment. People forget and people are lazy. This technology would save lives. Without the help of another person (which believe me, a lot of people don't have that) they can die from no assistance. Do you think that when you're 60 and your loved one is dead that you'll be physically capable of taking your own medicine every single day? I'm not just talking about the diabetic or heart medication; I'm talking about the Arthritis, Alzheimer's, and the dozens of other medications that you might have to take when you are 60, 70 or even 90 years old.

[bamak93]

I'm not denying the wonderful capabilities that something like this has to offer. I'm just saying that it opens us up to many forms of attack.

[Devious]

And I have shown you that those forms of attack are simply unlikely or impossible at this point in time. What would a terrorist do with information on this technology? This isn't something that is able to receive input from any console outside of its own. Therefore no one can control it unless they get a hold of either the person or the distributor and reprogram the device itself. That goes with saying that a terrorist or someone with vile intent even knows how to work the damn thing.

[bamak93]

It could. It receives signals from a base station, and to serve as a reminder, they would probably implement one to be sent.

And what if those reminders came in the form of tiny machines in the bloodstream? There are an infinite possibilities of the function and design of this device.

While it may be difficult to cause a terrorist attck, I'm only saying that it is a possibility, and an ever present one at that.

[Devious]

Tiny machines in the bloodstream? You're talking about nano-bots now? Nano-bots are nowhere near possible at this time. Nor do we have the technology to create something so small that can also receive commands and transmit information. That would take a few more decades, unfortunately.

Don't you think that most scientists have the idea in their head that something might go wrong in that fashion? Of course, but I highly doubt that anyone short of a bio-engineer specifically trained to operate this machinery could actually do much harm. At most, I'd say that someone could cause all operating monitors in the body to send out a faulty alert. But control the body? I highly doubt it.

If the “in-body network” recorded that the person had suddenly collapsed, it would send an alert, via a nearby base station at their home, to a surgery or hospital.

Basically this is saying that the machinery sends information, does not receive. The information is then sent to a station that is set up in the home (my guess would be a computer or near that fashion) and is then sent to a nearby hospital with the exact address, phone number, nearest kin, etc.

At least, that's what I draw from it. Times Magazine doesn't have many writers that are very good at proper articulation.

[Raeneth]

And so the real world gets one more step closer to becoming just like the Matrix.

[violent_anger]

What are you some slow-motion-fighting hater?

So uh....why can't they just put a strap around their chest that does the exactly same thing?

[Devious]

Because that requires effort and people are lazy.

"Should I put on my heart monitor today? Nah, it doesn't really go with my outfit and I have yoga in two hours..."