Talk:Microchip implant (human)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Technology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles Computing Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Low-importance). Medicine Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Transhumanism High‑importance Microchip implant (human)' is part of WikiProject Transhumanism, which aims to organize, expand, clean up, and guide Transhumanism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page for more details.TranshumanismWikipedia:WikiProject TranshumanismTemplate:WikiProject TranshumanismTranshumanism articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. For more information and how you can help click Show: If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page for more details. Quick help: Main talk page Article layout Wikipedia:Research resources Article development Citing sources, Verifying sources and Original research Assume good faith and be civil See changes to: Core articles Transhumanism article New Transhumanism articles To Do List: edit - history - watch - purge be bold Show off a userbox with {{userWPA}} or {{userWPA2}} and attract potential members Help with articles. See this month's adopt an article. Help out with the To-do lists Be consistent Use a "standard" layout for transhumanism related articles (see: The perfect article, and Featured articles) Add Transhumanism navigation template on the bottom of all transhumanism articles; (use {{Transhumanism}} or see navigation template) Add Transhumanism info box to all transhumanism related talk pages (use {{Wpa}} or see info box ) Add [[Category:transhumanism]] to the bottom of all transhumanism related articles, so it shows up on the list of transhumanism articles Maintenance / Etc Find/cite sources for all positions of an article (see citing sources . Try to expand stubs, however, some "new" articles may be deletion process ) Watch the list of transhumanism related articles and add to accordingly (see transhumanism articles) And always write for an encyclopedia . Create Notable transhumanist articles Shorten / merge into others Expand a transhumanism stub Your immediate attention false choice into false dilemma - discuss whether you are for or against this merge here Clarify references in Transhumanism, using footnotes. Skepticism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contents of the PositiveID page were merged into Microchip implant (human). For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

This whole article is filled with cases of "use" that on closer inspection is a proposal somebody made, or at best an experimental gateway to existing protocols. Case in point the article used to refer to a Swedish enthusiast who had made an app to pick up the QR code used to identify a vaccine passport as a "vaccine passport" use, when it is not even a QR code use.

Likewise with tagging of criminals, that haven't been in real use from what I can see.

There is an existing "Potential future applications" that might be appropriate for some of these use cases. I didn't touch "Notable people" where we got the aforementioned Swede, but it is a question how notable they really are in a Wikipedia sense. It could be a handy section for biohacker/experimental ideas though. At a minimum it should be moved further down the article.

I propose these subcategories would qualify as "use":

• Systems designed with the use of subcutaneous chips in mind, either exclusively or inclusively
• Notable systems not designed for them, but where chipping gives a clear advantage for a substantial number of users

--jax (talk) 07:09, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the sentence ' In Judaism, Conservative, Orthodox, and Reform Jewish beliefs hold that that cutting, piercing or marking the flesh, a requirement for implantation, is contrary to the notion that people were made "in the image of God", and the orders in Leviticus 19:28.'. The citations provided were incorrect, and reference only tattooing, body modification, and self-inflicted gashes. An RFID tag does not fall under the category of body modification as it does not hamper, alter, or modify the bodies function in any way - it's more like a pacemaker.

- PhoenixCodes 75.240.182.6 (talk) 23:59, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The entry as it stands (ca. Feb. 20, 2007) makes these implants sound really useful and good! This fact undermines the very premise of Wikipedia.

I do not follow this argument. Please explain? Mossig 20:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning the GPS feature of this chip, isn't it rumoured that one of Prince Charles' Sons' has one of these chips implanted somewhere inside of him in the event of kidnapping? Also, it was my understanding that there is no need to "power" one of these chips so to speak, that they function on a type of inert power. Or perhaps perpetual motion. I haven't been able to verify any of this, so please research it, as i will, and let's find the truth to all this! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.151.189.221 (talk • contribs)

I see little point in introducing rumors that relate only slightly to the topic. Even if the Prince Charles thing could be verified, this article would not be the best location for such information. No perpetual motion power source exists as of yet. Many RFID tags, including implants, require no power source as they pull power from the signal sent by the scanner. However, a GPS tracker requires a processor of some sort in order to preform the triangulation equations to find out where it is, and that processor requires more power than can be pulled from the signal. Since the implant would have to be constantly updating its position 24/7, the power source would wear out in a few years, max. 69.107.67.224 19:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The GPS section is opinion and OR. And apparently wrong, anyway. See http://www.lightninggps.com/personal-tracking/gps-implant.html. This device also claims to solve the power problem with biopower. Fitzaubrey (talk) 09:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article should pertain to scientific facts, not religious paranoia and superstition. —The preceding

Please sign your comments. Religious reaction to the chips is a viable discussion point (as long as it's cited, etc. 23skidoo 23:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I shunted that paragraph elsewhere. It is a religious argument pushed by conspiracy theorists based in the USA, not representative of global or even American mainstream opinion. Unless it was a crucial part of how this "story" developed, it doesn't belong in the main text. GM Pink Elephant (talk) 15:47, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I thought so Chris-marsh-usa (talk) 01:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC) Try Peter and Paul LaLonde "Mark of the Beast"[reply]

Can we substantiate that the microchip implants are always visible? This is important. The presumption is the Apostle John saw the 20th Century-21st Century from the 1st Century AD. If a microchip implant is invisible, there would be nothing for John to see and describe. John obviously saw and described a mark. I'm surprised it wasn't a bar code, it makes a better "mark"Chris-marsh-usa (talk) 01:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it wasn't for those verses describing a mark that could take the place of money, I'd be in favor of the implant.Chris-marsh-usa (talk) 01:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will sign nothing. —The preceding

unsigned comment was added by EightyOne (talk • contribs) 11:36, 10 September 2006 (UTC).[reply

]

We can sign it for you. But more importantly, who are you to say what this article should pertain to, when you do not follow Wikipedia policy? --Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 10:27, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The mark of the beast viewpoint is held by many people, and should be included. It affects how many westerners, particularly americans view them, and thus affects a large part of the world.

It's ironic though how Christians would be among the most willing to accept these implants... 75.138.110.179 (signed by myself)

I agree that this should be mentioned since there are videos all over youtube that talk about this thing, and the consensus of Christians is that the mark of the beast will most likely be a computer chip/RFID chip of some sort. --Petrafan007 (talk) 16:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we can't source something like this to Youtube videos. If there is a reputable published source that describes the prevalence of this belief, we can discuss whether to use it in the article. Without a good source we really can't even get started. Looie496 (talk) 16:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most Christians have it all backwards. Revelation is telling us that the Mark of the Beast now exists (& always has) because it means people believe "one must buy & sell something" but the chip implant will destroy that belief (must buy & sell). The chip implant can be (& is being) used now to do "evil" by tracking people who are slaves, firing slaves who might get sick, but the chip implant for every person will eliminate all "evil" so that tracking people will be used only for the good of helping people. It's the wage system that makes the evil possible, so we must end the wage.

What is being said in Revelation is that when every person has a Guaranteed Income (RFID for the water of Life) that will destroy the Mark of the Beast, so that no one will ever be forced to buy or sell something again. Then most jobs can be eliminated, especially the harmful ones (most are harmful), & it won't harm a person who loses their "job" & wage because they'll all eventually have a chip implant which will eliminate money, for cashless perfection worldwide (God's Perfect way) & all people will own all things to eliminate money. Cashless perfection will obviously be perfect, with no poverty, no debt, no renting, no insurance, no bills to pay, & eventually no work. The only work will be part-time until automation eliminate all the work ("no more curse"). The Guaranteed Income (RFID) will stop crimes & wars, & then every person can have free lifelong computer learning, & all people will learn science & medicine, & 5-10 languages. Then all nations will save lives & the earth by working part-time building only 100-story live/work/play Tower cities connected to Trains (since God still says "choose life" & cars killed 20 million; & it will be safe living in T&T but living on the ground is unsafe (hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, too hot, too cold, & all problems are caused by living on the ground, today in houses & cars, forced to commute). Revelation is not telling of the tragic end of the world (life on earth) but tells of the beginning of Perfection on earth for every person "wherein dwells righteousness" & no more poverty, or money, & no need to buy & sell something or starve. The last 2 chapters tell of the future 100-story live/work/play Tower cities connected to Trains, & spaceships, that all nations will build, because T&T will save lives, save earth, & eliminate the work (no more curse). "We shall meet him in the air" (I Thes 4:17) means we'll build & live in Towers & Trains & find cures to all diseases, & progress will be much faster when we end world poverty with the RFID in every person for cashless perfection. Sundiiiaaa 04:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see how an RFID chip will guarantee income to someone... your comment makes no economic sense at all. Who will pay this guaranteed income?

Also, your arguments about "Towers, Trains and Spaceships" are almost as silly (and unconnected to scripture) as the Xenu story 148.240.253.118 (talk) 00:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:No personal attacks--76.116.105.50 (talk) 23:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wealth comes from something created, made, from work. Wealth would disappear if work disappeared.Chris-marsh-usa (talk) 01:22, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a scientifically minded person I understand the objection to including references to the "mark of the beast" in the article but it brings up relevant ethical concerns. It is important that people realize that this technology has the potential to undermine their freedom and privacy or even to subjugate them to total control. This technology potentially replaces passports, personal identification, money, credit cards, keys, GPS among other things. If one day it becomes the only way to accomplish these tasks e.g. you can't buy anything without it, open any door without it, start any car without it, then it it becomes dangerous. Everything you do, where you can go or not, what you can buy or can't buy all of it can potentially be monitored and controlled. If you have no alternatives like cash they can keep tabs on everything you do. Who knows what impact this will have on our health 30 years down the line - I suggest someone research the ethical and moral implications of this. The term "mark of the beast" is interesting because the technology is currently being used among other things to keep inventory of livestock. And like cattle you may not have any choice or say in the matter. As I said Im not a christian but regardless of interpretation the message of the prophecy is I believe intended to make us think about its meaning and relevance to our own lives and time. Likewise with Noah's ark - wether you take it literally or not is not the point. Its about the message - that good prevails over evil. We live in a factual and scientific age where facts and information has prevalence over moral values, ethical concerns or ancient warnings about a possible future. The use of this technology isn't a question of wether or not its possible but wether or not we are in using it consigning our rights, freedom and privileges over to governments to potentially control or have an unprecedented amount of control over our lives. What if the government has more control than we have of our own lives - at that point your life no longer belongs to you. If that government is not acting in our individual best interest but taking control of our lives for the greater good of mankind (or its own agenda) - that I think is the message and what we should be thinking about - This too good to be true passport, personal identification, universal credit card, key, tracking device all rolled in one is inescapable if its part of you. Also if it becomes compulsory which I believe it inevitably will it removes individual choice, rights and control so its a bad thing and a step in the wrong direction. Prophecies like those in the book of Revelation is intended to make us think about the bigger picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.146.7.31 (talk) 10:48, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just give a reminder that Wikipedia talk pages are for discussing the article, not the topic. If you want to continue this, please frame it in terms of how the article should be changed, and what reputable published sources support the suggested changes. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 16:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted this line from the "disadvantages" section: "Potential threat to liberty and or compromise to religious salvation". This sounds a bit dubious. The religious arguments are covered elsewhere, and the "threat to liberty" argument is also implied elsewhere. 23skidoo 23:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC) fvgfdh[reply]

The body modification was harder without the current technologic advances. In 21st century they didn’t use to implant microchip, transmitter or other artificial artefacts in the body for improve some skills related to the job, sport or anything else. For example not only the door of your home is able to detect you when you approach thanks to the transmitter but it can also be connected to your brain to solve math operations as fast as a computer, or carry out tasks automatically, liberating the worker from the tedious jobs. --194.164.233.215 (talk) 10:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An implant at the most basic practical level relays vitals, location & audio information. In a balancing act serving civilisation for the better, any 'downed' subject contesting a moral correctness - acting against a legal course of action or one who enforces it - may well be implanted discreetly. Consider this is the first step into that future of overall goodness, and that 'civilisation' is by definition 'comfort'... There comes a point when everyone desirous of reward for effort attunes a sense of good & right and would say a thing supporting the nature and purpose of implants. Mobile phones are a strong suggestion along those lines if you care to appreciate such a subtext whether or not you follow it's plot as the primary goal of the technology therein.

Add to this basic implant technology a jolt, a stun & 'paracide' (vis-a-vis tyrannicide) functionality, and it is a repellant to dissuade criminal misdeed or even just subtly miscreant activity... Include a two-way means and it is the most convenient mobile phone technology with further advances providing AV transmission, computer processing to neural platform interface, even medicinal relief to complete sustained placebo effect....

It will always have nay-sayers pitted against supporters for those reasons alone, but to take the step and live in such a world raises a further vital question; Do we all have to undergo implant proceedure so that we do not have a 'control group' in our midst that creates such powerfully opposing factions?

- xtian170174  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.58.48 (talk) 13:01, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

Revelation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.5.203.193 (talk) 15:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the "Possible Problems Section", I think this really needs a reliable citation if its going to stay there. I believe (if I recall correctly) the animals used in the study were from lines developed to be prone to tumors (in other words not applicable to day to day implantation). Ibycus314 (talk)

yeah, i removed the "citation needed" because there was a citation right after it. anything else? 75.70.62.80 (talk) 22:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finger implant that monitors blood sugar levels

http://www.inhabitat.com/2010/03/03/implantable-solar-powered-chip-monitors-blood-sugar-levels/

Human arm that transmits 10 Mpbs of data through it (South Korean scientists)

http://www.inhabitat.com/2010/03/16/researchers-transmit-10mbps-broadband-data-through-human-arm/

http://gizmodo.com/5493931/south-korean-scientists-transmit-broadband-signals-through-human-arm

http://www.newkerala.com/news/fullnews-71427.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by DonL (talk • contribs) 18:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would be much better to describe these things in the article if they are relevant, and use the links as references. It is a constant struggle to keep Wikipedia from turning into a mere link farm. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 18:48, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The section needs serious trimming or its own article. It's significantly longer than the 'medical considerations' section and several times longer than the 'social considerations' one, making the whole article look slightly biased in terms of NPOV. Religion isn't what this article is about.~~ Nicholas A. Chambers (talk) 19:12, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trimmed.~~ Nicholas A. Chambers (talk) 19:43, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"In Christianity, a few believe the implantation of chips may be the fulfillment of the Mark of the Beast, prophesied to be a requirement for buying and selling" This sentence from the article blatantly marginalises a long held legitimate concern & widespread belief of the worlds largest religious group. Surely Wikipedia isn't being used for marketing & political propaganda?! 86.149.156.150 (talk) 17:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide evidence that large numbers of people hold that belief? Looie496 (talk) 21:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article makes the claim of "a few Christians", but doesn't reference any surveys. The only similar survey I found says 1 in 4 Americans think Obama might be the antichrist. This suggests more than a few would think the chip was the mark of the beast. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/02/americans-obama-anti-christ-conspiracy-theories 86.183.119.76 (talk) 18:12, 13 February 2014 (UTC) Just changed to "many" instead of "a few". "Few" implies a minority which there is no evidence for. "Many" doesn't imply a majority, and judging by the amount of articles and videos online on the subject, many do believe it may be true. 86.167.98.22 (talk) 10:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The section with heading Tracking is pure speculation and contains no references. Parolees are tracked with a GPS/Phone device the size of a large cell phone, attached to the ankle. While implantable "GPS" trackers would be useful, they are more like science fiction at the moment. The paragraph above already speculates on the usefulness of such a device. I've removed the Tracking paragraph. Thomasonline (talk) 20:04, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is very difficult to find any legal opinions in relation to the covert implanting of RFID and other microchips into human beings without their knowledge or informed and expressed consent. Perhaps some knowledgeable legal whiz would like to fill in this section so that we all know what our rights are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.198.79 (talk) 13:27, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Microchip implant (human). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131225060958/http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/133495.php to http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/133495.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:59, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be helpful to add an X-Ray view? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:X-Ray_of_RFID_Implant.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.70.208.90 (talk) 02:49, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, I think that image is helpful for my ability to better visualize what it would be like. Maybe in the Application section? It seems like the other image of the hand after an implant should be moved to that section too (as opposed to the notable people section). Samueljcarlson (talk) 17:04, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the heading 'Anti-rhetoric claims' to 'Criticms and concerns.' While there are not standard headings across Wikipedia, this language matches the norms of other articles, which usually use words like criticism, concerns, or controversies. 'Anti', 'rhetoric', and 'claim' are all strongly connotatively laden.

- Moiggles (talk) 18:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problem: The article in question discuss RFID style microchip implants however there exists multiple new sciences ranging from drug admission microchip implants (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4914739/) , to neural interface microchip implants (see brain computer interface, brain implant, Neurallink) and more.

The article cannot be worked on further while ignoring historically important references of microchip implant history (such as first being conducted in usage with cattle), from various other types of common implants such as contraceptive implants (https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-032303247-6.10030-9) to ever evolving rapid changes in Cybernetics; Bionics, Prosthetics, and Neural Prosthesis in general.

This webpage will have to be renamed as "Microchip implant RFID" and left unmodified and only worked on for RFID related microchip or similar technology or remodeled to remove large parts of the webpage, including a notable persons and applications as the page itself reads much like a glorified social media post, then worked ground up to include a much broader field of microchip implant technology.

Proposal: To have a general Microchip implant page like the "Cybernetics" page on Wikipedia, that links to many other sub pages (fields) of Microchip implants such as this page "Microchip Implant RFID". If you go to the Cybernetics Wikipedia page, you will notice that while Cybernetics is a broad definition it includes many examples of Cybernetics subfields.

This is my first time on Wikipedia making such a suggestion, I'm happy to work on a draft article that will make the official "Microchip Implant (Human)" Wiki page that will include the general information and science on Microchipping implants, but also include sub-links such as this page.

What I need from You: This is my first time making such a proposal may someone please approve or deny my decision so I have an impartial non biassed control representation, or lead me to the right path to make an accurate decision, or contact a more prominent Wikipedia editor, reviewer, author or admin to finalise the decision.

SumeetJi (talk) 15:26, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added a failed verification tag to the source in the MRI section. I plan to edit the section with a better source, but accidentally saved my summary without providing it (sorry about that, never done this before).

Source is below, will be looking for some more before writing. If someone wants to either write the section or revise what I submit, please do. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2020.01.008 Lesbiats (talk) 00:21, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There may be additional sources on the "it is safe" side of arguments here: https://forum.dangerousthings.com/t/x-series-implantable-transponder-faq/28#faq-mri

notably https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23763334/ and potentially also https://web.archive.org/web/20180309230013/http://www.mrisafety.com/SafetyInfov.asp?SafetyInfoID=262 Aveaoz (talk) 23:22, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saan maka bili nito 49.146.183.35 (talk) 09:13, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted this sentence from the Christianity View section: The same year NPR reported that patients who signed up to receive treatment under the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) would be implanted.^[1]

The article doesn't at all say that the ACA requires chipping. It states this as a myth and then goes on to describe how the myth originated and ends saying it's not true. There's also nothing in the article that particularly associates belief in the myth with Christians or Christianity. MarkG1959 (talk) 18:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]