Obamacare and Mark of Beast... wrong time to be a nurse?

BrandonLPN, LPN · Jun 30, 2012

As a general rule, the more outlandish a story (such as the government implanting chips into everybody) the more skeptical you should be. I think what stunned and amused so many of us was not that you didn't do any research. It was that you would believe such an absurd story in the first place. A story this silly dosen't need to be researched or verified, it should just be rejected out of hand. Consider it a lesson learned in gullibility.

itsmejuli · Jun 30, 2012

Nobody got stirred emotionally by your post. We are simply incredulous that somebody pursueing the nursing field could make such statements as you have today without backing those thought up. We all expect intelligent exchange of ideas and thoughts.

Cali_Nurse_209 · Jun 30, 2012

Reading this post and all I have to say is Wow!!!!!

sauconyrunner · Jun 30, 2012

here's little quote from actual bill that I got: H.R. 3200 section 2521, Pg. 1001, paragraph 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-- ''is or has been used in or on a patient; ''and is-- ''a class III device; or ''a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining."
honestly I don't know what to believe anymore. some say it's hoax and gov will not require people to get it, and some others do. what the hell?

Ok, so you don't really understand what you are reading. A Medical Device registry is for Medical devices like PACEMAKERS (implantable, life supporting, life sustaining)or DEFIBRILLATORS, or HEMODIALYSIS CATHETERS. Here is a link to a document that may help. OVERVIEW: FDA Regulation of Medical Devices

SO, no one is sticking a chip in anyone- they are establishing a registry to keep a close eye on devices that are implanted in people to regulate their heart beat, shock them if they need it, or allow dialysis, etc. So if issues occur, they will be known rapidly and a fix can be implemented nationally. I personally do think the bill is an excellent thing for this country. But beyond that, I want to help YOU understand what you have read. Thats the only way to make up your mind.

KelRN215, BSN, RN · Jun 30, 2012

uh... no the school does not accept wikipedia. i said when it comes to school, i actually cite the work from credible sources because it is for grade; however, on here, i want to discuss and hear and learn, not write a extensive essay with workcited.
by the way, i researched some more online, and it seems that some people are calling it a hoax that gov requires people to get implant chips (because snope said so) and some others say snope is full of sh!t and some other sites state that on page 1004 of the bill, says that the new law requires people to receive an implant chip under their skins which tracks to personal bank information and others such as medical, financial, etc.
here's little quote from actual bill that I got: H.R. 3200 section 2521, Pg. 1001, paragraph 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— ‘‘is or has been used in or on a patient; ‘‘and is— ‘‘a class III device; or ‘‘a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.”
honestly I don't know what to believe anymore. some say it's hoax and gov will not require people to get it, and some others do. what the hell?

HR 3200 was.never.passed. HR 4872 is the correct bill. But what you quoted up there says absolutely nothing about implanting chips in the general public. Others have already explained this to you. How does "Medical device registry" = "the government is going to implant chips in everyone and include your bank information on it"?

It took me 2 seconds on Google to find thousands of links debunking the nonsense about a "chip" posted in the OP.

When you read something on the internet that sounds unbelievable, it's because it probably IS unbelievable.

snopes.com: Health Care Reform Legislation Requires Microchip Implantation?

IndyElmer · Jun 30, 2012

here's little quote from actual bill that I got: H.R. 3200 section 2521, Pg. 1001, paragraph 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-- ''is or has been used in or on a patient; ''and is-- ''a class III device; or ''a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining."

Although others have addressed the OP's misunderstanding of this passage, I'm not sure that anyone has explained it simply enough for the OP to understand, so first, an analogy...

You know how from time to time, car manufacturers will realize that there is an unacceptable failure rate in a digital or mechanical part on a car that is making their product dangerous for the people who drive their cars? So what do they do? They contact everyone who owns the affected vehicle and have them bring it in so that parts can be replaced thereby preventing a dangerous malfunction of their product. To be able to contact those customers, they keep a database (or registry) of everyone who purchases each of their vehicles. They hope to never need the vehicle buyer database, but they keep it nonetheless.

The medical device registry acts much the same as the vehicle buyer database. If the manufacturer of a particular model of pacemaker or hip replacement finds their product to be malfunctioning at an unacceptable rate, they have a way to know who has the affected medical device. A database of everyone who has that device implanted in them would allow the manufacturer to contact all of those people to make arrangements to take whatever actions are necessary to prevent a dangerous malfunction that could injure or even kill patients who have the affected device in their bodies.

Right now, there are a number of different databases/registries for keeping track of where different medical devices end up implanted. The bill passage that is excerpted above is simply a requirement to centralize this information in a national registry. This national registry would not only allow for easy contacting of patients in the event of higher-than-acceptable device malfunction rate, but it may (in theory) allow for more rapid identification of post-implantation issues with medical devices. If a particular pacemaker is tracked only by the manufacturer, there is a greater risk of them downplaying or even hiding any negative trends that they are seeing. An independent, third party database that can be analyzed for trends may be more likely to identify problems earlier, potentially saving man patients from injury/death.

Overall, I have a hard time imagining how the OP (or anyone else) could possibly see this type of database/registry as anything but a positive development.

mediajunkie650 · Jun 30, 2012

Will the law require all patients to be implanted with microchips?

FactCheck.org

No. Nothing like this appears in the new law, or in any of the bills that Congress considered. This claim stems from a wild misinterpretation of a provision in the original House leadership's bill (H.R. 3200) that did not require implantation of anything, and that was, in any case, not part of the final legislation. The part of the original House leadership's bill that's usually referenced to support this rather paranoid claim actually would have set up a registry for class III medical devices and class II devices that are "implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining." The Federal Drug Administration's classifications determine how much oversight and regulation the device has-class III devices (such as, for example, replacement heart valves or artificial hips) need pre-market FDA approval; class I devices (like x-ray film or tongue depressors) need only general quality controls. Class II devices, which need to meet performance standards but don't need pre-market approval, cover a wide range-blood pressure cuffs are class II, but so are cerebral shunts. That's why the bill specified implantable, life-supporting and life-sustaining devices.
But the bill did not mandate implantable devices of any kind, least of all microchips. Rather, it said that implantable devices will be registered so that physicians can access data about safety and effectiveness in a way that "protects patient privacy and proprietary information." And again, it didn't become law.

The PolitiFact debunking is here. It rated this rumor as a pants on fire.

I look for sites that have links to the original source material and in this case, snopes.com links to the .gov website. It's a fact checking site similar to politifact.com and factcheck.org only they have a tendency to check email rumors. It's a shame that people won't even read a sources information and make up their own mind using critical thinking skills. You have to actually read the link and evaluate for yourself; fact check the fact checkers.

GitanoRN, BSN, MSN, RN · Jun 30, 2012

enlightening~

xoemmylouox, ASN, RN · Jun 30, 2012

Interestingly enough, Canada has its own version of Obamacare in place! They'll be leaving one socialist country for another. LOL!
As one person puts it:

I am so glad someone else sees the humor in this.. What a bunch of ignorant fools.

**LibraSunCNM, BSN, MSN, CNM** · Jun 30, 2012

This thread has made my blood run cold. The limits of people's ignorance has no bounds.

On_the_on, BSN · Jun 30, 2012

**SNIP**
If you have been paying attention to newly passed Obamacare lately, you would notice there's a big fuss about the new care and its mandated requirement for all persons to receive a chip (I believe it was referred to as very chip, typeII, RFID) by 2013, which is the year I will graduate. Of course, I think that receiving the chip would be completely optional, considering that numbers of Christians in this country will certainly refute, but nevertheless, I believe that the countdown has begun for the mark 666. I don't really care too much about Obamacare itself, but the real problem to me is the chip part. Now it is pretty obvious that the hospitals will require nurses, along with physicians and others, to receive this chip in order to keep the job; I can just see that coming. But I don't believe in it, and I will not receive it; I probably leave to some other country.
**SNIP**
.

I have not read all the responses to this post yet, so this may have very well be said.

I have read the mandate, the actual mandate that was passed, several times. At no point, anywhere, did i read anything about being implanted with a chip.....and i think that is something I would have noticed.

I personally am against this particular mandate, but being implanted with a chip, just like the rumors for enforced euthanasia are just that, rumors spread from individuals who do not know what they are talking about. You can not be informed by others, do the research yourself!

On_the_on, BSN · Jun 30, 2012

let's discuss the matter about the chip, not about whether I really have to read that 900+ bill just so I can have my petty opinion about it. Don't tell me all of you read every single documents and mandates to form your opinions.

Actually, that is exactly what I do.....coming from a christian.