81 replies to this topic

[bc56]

http://www.opencongr.../111-h3200/text

The Obama Health care bill under Class II (Paragraph 1, Section specifically includes ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable." Then on page 1004 it describes what the term "data" means in paragraph 1, section B:

14 ‘‘( In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to in15
formation respecting a device described in paragraph (1),
16 including claims data, patient survey data, standardized
17 analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of
18 data from disparate data environments, electronic health
19 records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the
20 Secretary"

What exactly is a class II device that is implantable? Lets see...




Approved by the FDA, a class II implantable device is a "implantable radiofrequency
transponder system for patient identification and health information." The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as "claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary."



This sort of device would be implanted in the majority of people who opt to become covered by the public health care option. With the reform of the private insurance companies, who charge outrageous rates, many people will switch their coverage to a more affordable insurance plan. This means the number of people who choose the public option will increase. This also means the number of people chipped will be plentiful as well. The adults who choose to have a chip implanted are the lucky (yes, lucky) ones in this case. Children who are "born in the United States who at the time of birth is not otherwise covered under acceptable coverage" will be qualified and placed into the CHIP or Children's Health Insurance Program (what a convenient name). With a name like CHIP it would seem consistent to have the chip implanted into a child. Children conceived by parents who are already covered under the public option will more than likely be implanted with a chip by the consent of the parent. Eventually everyone will be implanted with a chip. And with the price and coverage of the public option being so competitive with the private companies, the private company may not survive.




So will everyone be covered by the public option eventually??????

And does that mean everyone will be chipped?????

[Neognosis]

Quote

This sort of device would be implanted in the majority of people who opt to become covered by the public health care option.

People like you are more dangerous than terrorists. You should spend your time getting upset over actual injustices, instead of imaginary delusions. I'm consoled by the fact that, hopefully, only people as out of touch with reality as you will buy into this nonsense.

[Ufo Believer]

Simple anwser. Yes. Finnaly some people are reading the Health care bill. It's bad.

[GreyWeather]

That was in consideration in the UK.

It never came to pass. On the surface, it's a great idea. If a stranger winds up falling over on the floor infront of you, no wallet / purse. Then when the Ambulance comes, they do a quick scan, find out you're diabetic and give you the according treatment. Potentially saving the persons life.

However just beneath the surface, is a great potential of invasion of privacy. If this was actually passed in the UK, Liebor would be monitering your every move, every word spoken from you, and to you. If they had their way...


If it ever was passed. It would obviously be optional, even if they were covered by the Health System. Just because it's free, doesn't mean you lose all your freedoms...

I love how Americans are up in arms about having a free healthcare to cover those less able to afford healthcare today.

I remember hearing an American saying; "If Steven Hawkings was British, and went to the NHS, he would not have lived near as long as he has done."   .

[SRCivic98]

All I can say is that I'm not going to be chipped and neither are my wife or children. To be chipped is like having a trace on you at all times. Almost as if you're some kind of criminal. Which would mean they could see where you're at, what you're doing, how you're doing it, and when. It's another way to control what freedoms we have and the ones we're not allowed to have anymore. But if everyone got chipped then eventually that would also or may give them the ability to send an electric pulse through your system to kill you if you're too old, you do something they disapprove of, or lastly, to control the population...kind of like what's going on with all these new viruses and illnesses. Seems like a set up somewhere or another.

[Neognosis]

Good lord.. nobody is going to "chip you."

[Startraveler]

Quote

This sort of device would be implanted in the majority of people who opt to become covered by the public health care option. . .With a name like CHIP it would seem consistent to have the chip implanted into a child.

Whoever wrote this is a liar and, frankly, (with that CHIP comment) an imbecile. There's no polite way to say it.

The section of the bill referenced here is dedicated to creating a National Medical Device Registry. What is the purpose of this registry?

Quote

The registry would list devices by type, model and serial number or other unique identifier. It is intended to help HHS assess the post-market safety and effectiveness of all class III devices, and all class II devices that are implantable, life-supporting or life-sustaining, according to the bill.

The registry, to be established by HHS, would link data provided by manufacturers to FDA with outcomes data from multiple sources.

The outcomes data would be drawn from Medicare claims data, patient survey data, electronic health records, and standardized analytic files maintained by CMS and the Department of Veterans Affairs. It could also come from private databases, such as pharmaceutical purchase and insurance claims data.

The registry data and analyses would be made available to the public without revealing private patient data or proprietary information, the bill states.

The bill also authorizes HHS to require device makers to submit "such other information as is necessary to facilitate post-market assessments of device safety and effectiveness and notification of device risks."

It might help to understand what Class II and Class III devices actually are. The FDA gives these designations to show where exactly in the regulatory scheme a device lies.

(1) Class I means the class of devices that are subject to only the
general controls authorized by or under sections 501 . . . A device is in class I if (i) general
controls are sufficient to provide reasonable assurance of the safety
and effectiveness of the device . . .
    (2) Class II means the class of devices that is or eventually will
be subject to special controls. A device is in class II if general
controls alone are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of its
safety and effectiveness and there is sufficient information to
establish special controls . . .
    (3) Class III means the class of devices for which premarket
approval is or will be required in accordance with section 515 of the
act. A device is in class III if insufficient information exists to
determine that general controls are sufficient to provide reasonable
assurance of its safety and effectiveness . . .

    (d) Implant means a device that is placed into a surgically or
naturally formed cavity of the human body. A device is regarded as an
implant for the purpose of this part only if it is intended to remain
implanted continuously for a period of 30 days or more, unless the
Commissioner determines otherwise in order to protect human health.
    (e) Life-supporting or life-sustaining device means a device that is
essential to, or that yields information that is essential to, the
restoration or continuation of a bodily function important to the
continuation of human life.

I've bolded the parts of the definition that explain why HHS would want to evaluate the post-market safety and effectiveness of certain Class II and all Class III devices.

H.R. 3200 does not say anywhere that anyone (in the public option or not) has to get some sort of implant. It merely says that medical devices have to be registered. That's a pretty enormous difference.

Quote

So will everyone be covered by the public option eventually??????

No. The point of the public option is encourage private insurers to lower or at least control their "outrageous rates." They will do so to remain competitive and so they will still retain a good share of the market. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that in a few years about 11-12 million people will be in the public option. Everyone else will either be obtaining private insurance in the individual insurance markets or they will be getting it through their employer.

Quote

And does that mean everyone will be chipped?????

Of course it doesn't. Here's a tip to assist you in thinking critically: if someone makes a claim about a bill and quotes part of the text of the bill and the quoted bit doesn't support their claim, they're probably lying.  Nowhere does the bill suggest anyone has to be chipped.

Quote

Finnaly some people are reading the Health care bill. It's bad.

It really isn't. People are just going crazy attempting to distort what's in the bill (see: this thread). If you want to know what's really in there, check the links in this thread.

Edited by Startraveler, 31 August 2009 - 05:40 PM.

[danielost]

Neognosis, on 31 August 2009 - 05:33 PM, said:

Good lord.. nobody is going to "chip you."

ever hear of the mark of the beast.

[Neognosis]

Quote

ever hear of the mark of the beast.

Ever hear of putting down your **EDIT** bible long enough to open your eyes and see reality, not this fantastical world you've created? Startraveler put it correctly when startraveler said

Quote

Whoever wrote this is a liar and, frankly, (with that CHIP comment) an imbecile. There's no polite way to say it.

**Tone it down, Neo.**

Edited by aquatus1, 31 August 2009 - 07:56 PM.

[acidhead]

Neognosis, on 31 August 2009 - 03:15 PM, said:

People like you are more dangerous than terrorists. You should spend your time getting upset over actual injustices, instead of imaginary delusions. I'm consoled by the fact that, hopefully, only people as out of touch with reality as you will buy into this nonsense.

Just curious...

Its obvious you're upset over the OP's comments and opinion....

Do you feel labeling him a 'terrorist' adds credence to the general public's understanding of the bill?

Edited by acidhead, 31 August 2009 - 06:22 PM.

[GreyWeather]

danielost, on 31 August 2009 - 05:51 PM, said:

ever hear of the mark of the beast.

Ever heard of religious BS?

'Cause the 'Mark of the Beast' is in the core of it. Especially since the beast has been dead for what... Just under 2000 years? Do a lil research, and you have yourself Emporer Nero, 616. Revelations is about the culling of early christians.


If it's not Capitalist private health care blowing free health care out of all proportion. Then it's the religious...

acidhead, on 31 August 2009 - 06:21 PM, said:

Just curious...

Its obvious you're upset over the OP's comments and opinion....

Do you feel labeling him a 'terrorist' adds credence to the general public's understanding of the bill?

More than likely. He was referring to the fact that after every terrorist attack, some new law is brought in that restricts a persons freedom or human rights, just a little bit to make a little difference from how things used to be.

Terrorists - their actions - result in some form of freedom taken. Or even a basic law of human rights.

Blowing something out of proportion that could and can help a whole population, especially if they cannot afford something as vital as health care. Are damaging a persons human right of life.

Many poor Americans cannot go to hospital, due to the huge bills that will pop through their letter box a week later. Cut off two fingers while sawing wood? No health insurance? How much money do you have? Aw, well, take out a loan right now, and maybe we can re-attach your fingers. If not, get out my hospital.

If they can't afford that, then how could they pay for treatment of say a hernia, or a heavily fractured bone that needs splints to help the healing process.

Edited by GreyWeather, 31 August 2009 - 06:35 PM.

[Neognosis]

Quote

Do you feel labeling him a 'terrorist' adds credence to the general public's understanding of the bill?

I didn't call him a terrorist. You should know better. I said he is more dangerous than a terrorist, because he is.

[acidhead]

Neognosis, on 31 August 2009 - 06:29 PM, said:

I didn't call him a terrorist. You should know better. I said he is more dangerous than a terrorist, because he is.

Just curious...

What is more dangerous than a terrorist, as you proposed?

[Neognosis]

Because a terrorist only kills a set number of people. Cranks like that person disrupt the entire political system and the integrity of our republican democracy, resulting in far worse damage, and ulitmately, more destruction than a simple car bomb. Misinformation and false propaganda wins wars and changes minds more than acts of terrorism.

[acidhead]

Neognosis, on 31 August 2009 - 06:37 PM, said:

Because a terrorist only kills a set number of people. Cranks like that person disrupt the entire political system and the integrity of our republican democracy, resulting in far worse damage, and ulitmately, more destruction than a simple car bomb. Misinformation and false propaganda wins wars and changes minds more than acts of terrorism.

Just curious...

Have you read the healthcare reform bill.... or are you, like many forum members here, taking Startravelers word for it?

also...

Do you feel that "cranks like that person (who) disrupt the entire political system and the integrity of our republican(?) democracy" should be labeled as "more dangerous than terrorists" and perhaps, sent to prison or a re-education camp by the Federal Government?

Edited by acidhead, 31 August 2009 - 06:54 PM.