by Christina Luisa
August 25, 2011
microchipped is now being spun as
a method of protecting the health of hospital patients.
To help mask the practice of this bodily
invasion with a trendy, high-tech appearance, microchipping sensors
are being referred to as "electronic tattoos" that can attach to
human skin and stretch and move without breaking.
Supposedly the comparisons of this hair-thin electronic patch-like
chip to an electronic tattoo are being made because of how it
adheres to the skin like a temporary tattoo using only water.
The small chip is less than 50 micrometers thick, which is thinner
in diameter than a human hair. It is being marketed as a "safe" and
easy way to temporarily monitor the heart and brain in patients
while replacing bulky medical equipment currently being used in
This device uses micro-electronics technology called an epidermal
electronic system (EES) and is said to be a development that will
"transform" medical sensing technology, computer gaming and even spy
operations, according to a study published last week.
The hair-thin chip was developed by an international team of
researchers from the United States, China and Singapore and is
described in the Journal of Science.
link between animal microchipping and cancer
Pet microchips have become increasingly common over the past few
years. These chips are marked with a small barcode that can be
scanned just like the tags on grocery items.
This seems to suggest that microchips are meant to turn the wearer
into an object that can be tracked and catalogued. Once inserted in
an animal, the chip stays there for the entirety of its lifetime and
can be used to identify the pet if it should be found on the street
or turned into a shelter. The subdermal chips are often recommended
by vets and animal care experts as a way to ensure lost pets find
their way home again.
But research suggests that despite their proclaimed usefulness, pet
microchips may cause cancer. Multiple studies have clearly linked
pet microchips with increased incidence of cancer and tumors in mice
In the past, public disclosure of these suggested links between
microchipping and cancer in animals stirred widespread concern over
the safety of implantable microchips in living beings.
The animal microchip study findings that
created such an uproar were so persuasive that Dr. Robert Benezra,
head of the Cancer Biology Genetics Program at the Memorial
Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, was quoted in an article
about microchipping as saying,
"There's no way in the world, having
read this information, that I would have one of those chips
implanted in my skin, or in one of my family members."
A 2001 study found that 1% of rats with implanted microchips
developed cancerous tumors near the chip location.
At least a dozen animal studies have
been done between 1990 and 2007 and most concluded that microchips
significantly increased the risk of cancer at the microchip site.
Soon we'll all
have "cool electronic tattoos!"
All the electronic parts of the new EES chip are built out of wavy,
snake-like components which allow them to be stretched and squeezed.
They also contain tiny solar cells which
can generate power or get energy from electromagnetic radiation. The
sensor is mounted on to a water-soluble sheet of plastic and
attached to the body by brushing the surface with water - hence the
comparison to a temporary tattoo.
This new device being implanted in hospital patients certainly looks
and acts like a microchip - yet it is persistently being referred to
as an "electronic tattoo" in order to make the concept appear
harmless, friendly - even trendy!
microchips - is the cost worth the convenience?
Scientists claim the supposed advantage of the EES chips is their
ability to cut back on the bevy of wires, gel-coated sticky pads and
monitors that are currently relied on to keep track of the vital
signs of hospital patients.
Apparently these traditional forms of
bulky equipment and monitors are overly "distressing" to patients.
It appears scientists believe these new microchips are convenient
enough that they outweigh the potential risks.
In test trials, the microchip was purposefully attached to the
throat of a human and used to detect differences in words such as
up, down, left, right, go and stop. Researchers used these functions
to control a simple computer game.
Is the convenience of not having to manually operate equipment great
enough to justify the implantation of an electronic sensor beneath
the skin of humans? Would you trust a microchip to monitor your
bodily functions without causing health hazards in the process?
The future of
America - microchipped zombies
Researchers believe the technology could be used to replace
traditional wires and cables, but this sounds remarkably like an
excuse used to cover up the real truth:
that this new microchipping
method is a way to ensure all of us are eventually microchipped and
able to be tracked and monitored.
Soon, everyone will be required to wear
chips or "tattoos" that prove they got their vaccinations, to link
to health records, credit history and social security records.
If the government can require Americans to carry microchipped
documents including your work, financial and health records, it
seems it is only a matter of time before these chips will be
implanted for the sake of "convenience" or "security."
According to them, all of this is being
done "for our own good."
Read more and watch videos about the government's agenda to
microchip all humans by 2017 here: