backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 49 comment(s) - last by NT78stonewobbl.. on Sep 18 at 2:59 AM


Blogger Amal Gustfra shows off his first RFID implants.  (Source: http://amal.net/)
Numerous studies linking RFID implants to cancer in animals, are gaining significant attention

Last week, Dailytech reported that California's State senate had blocked employers from requiring their employees to get "chipped"--implanted with an RFID chip that would allow for radio identification and tracking.

Now in addition to the privacy concerns, a new report by the Associate Press has brought to light serious doubts on RFID implants' medical safety.

The report details how numerous studies on RFID implants in animal test subjects, starting in the mid-1990s, revealed that the implants led to a significant increase in malignant tumor growth.

Keith Johnson, a retired toxological pathologist who led one of these studies, in 1996 at Dow Chemical Co., when interviewed in the report stated that he had no doubts about whether RFID was to blame for the increased incidence of cancer.  He is quoted as clearly stating, "The transponders were the cause of the tumors."

The findings were reviewed by top cancer specialists, who found the results disturbing.  They cautioned people that these tests were performed on animals, so that they were not necessarily applicable in humans, however, most felt additional research was a necessity.  Some went as far to say that they would not allow family members to receive implants.

Currently about 2,000 people worldwide have received RFID chips implants, according to VeriChip, the leading manufacturer of FDA-approved RFID implants, including a couple who were ordered to do so by their employer.

Verichip commented that they were "not aware of any studies that have resulted in malignant tumors in laboratory rats, mice and certainly not dogs or cats."

The company also, sells RFID chips for animals.

A significant detail to these studies is that many of them were not intended to study the correlation between RFID chip implanting to cancer--rather, during research on a separate topic the increased cancer rates were high enough to catch the researchers' attention and allow them to draw a clear conclusion that the chip was causing the increased cancer rate.

The AP report goes on to discuss the suspect nature of the FDA's approval of VeriChip's human RFID implant.  The FDA is overseen by the Department of Health and Human Sciences, which at the time of the approval, was headed by Tommy Thompson.

Just two weeks after the Jan. 10, 2005 approval of the device, Tommy Thompson resigned his post with the department and within five months assumed a position at VeriChip.  He received stock options and cash compensation for his newly acquired position.

Thompson, until recently a candidate for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, recently denied in an interview having any familiarity with VeriChip before his resignation.

The FDA refused to comment on which studies it reviewed when approving the device.

A recent AMA report which lauded RFID implants, claimed to be entirely unaware of the studies correlating the implant to cancer.  Dr. Steven Stack, an AMA board member, said he had never heard the studies ever mentioned before.

As Dr. Stack had knowledge of the Department of Health and Human Sciences committee's review of the implant, pending FDA approval, this statement would indicate that the Committee did not take these studies into account during its approval process.

More research needs to be done before final conclusions are drawn, but as its dirty laundry comes to light, the controversial practice of RFID implanting and its FDA approval has received another major setback.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Im trying to not read into this...
By Bioniccrackmonk on 9/10/2007 11:42:19 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Just two weeks after the Jan. 10, 2005 approval of the device, Tommy Thompson resigned his post with the department and within five months assumed a position at VeriChip. He received stock options and cash compensation for his newly acquired position.


But I caught a whiff of something that stinks, am I the only one?




RE: Im trying to not read into this...
By Hyperlite on 9/10/2007 12:05:47 PM , Rating: 3
if thats not blatant, i don't know what is.


RE: Im trying to not read into this...
By Misty Dingos on 9/10/2007 1:47:39 PM , Rating: 4
When I retired from the USAF I would have had to wait a year or more to join a firm that I had any dealings with while in uniform. If I didn't do that I could be prosecuted and sent to prison. Apparently the FDA doesn't have a rule like that. But they should.


RE: Im trying to not read into this...
By Martimus on 9/12/2007 3:50:23 PM , Rating: 2
Not quite. You could just stop working with that particular company for a year, then retire and take the position with that company; as long as you don't work with the same program that you had cognizance over. I have seen it at least a few times with the people I work with (although it is almost always an O-5 or above). Some of these deals have been a little shady, and a few people end up in prison over the shady deals they have made with the contractor (I haven't met any of these people, but we hear about them in our ethics training).


By NT78stonewobble on 9/18/2007 2:51:36 AM , Rating: 2
In this case atleast.

The guy doesn't work with the same things but lo and behold he still got the $$$.

I think it stinks...


RE: Im trying to not read into this...
By masher2 (blog) on 9/10/07, Rating: -1
By borowki on 9/10/2007 8:35:07 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm, the FDA is under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).


By wordsworm on 9/14/2007 8:24:57 PM , Rating: 2
I read somewhere that the former governor of California got a lot of benefits from prison peeps after putting through the 3 strikes = 25 years. If you ask me, that's a leap in a much more sinister direction. A politician gets paid to put people in prison for longer... It's amazing that this kind of thing is allowed.


By Screwballl on 9/14/2007 12:04:31 PM , Rating: 2
I hope karma kicks this guy in the pants... hard.


Hrmm
By TimberJon on 9/10/2007 6:26:35 PM , Rating: 2
Cannot heat by itself generate a bit of electricity?

Bio electrics?

I would imagine that somehow the small amount of electricity the body might be able to generate near this device may cause some kind of loop, which may agitate or parilyze cells in the area. The body is a strange and still-mysterious thing, and its abilities are not predictable.

Its pretty inert, but to what kinds of testing? The body reacts to microscopic changes in heat, moisture, electricity, friction, Etc.. etc..




darwin award
By Shadowmaster625 on 9/10/07, Rating: -1
RE: darwin award
By TomZ on 9/10/2007 3:44:50 PM , Rating: 3
Nobody "deserves" to die from cancer. Cancer is a nasty disease. Wise up.


RE: darwin award
By Chocobollz on 9/16/2007 4:39:00 AM , Rating: 2
Everybody will die eventually, and you cannot choose on how you'll die, instead, God will choose it for us ^ ^; And so, I guess, the "deserve/not deserve" debacle has no point. Sometimes they're really deserve it and sometimes they're not. It just how life's works. You can't change the future nor the past, and even if you does, you'll prolly kill the universe because of paradox.

Well, me myself, for the sake of humanity, do not agree with all of these chips implantation, especially in human body. We all should get back to nature, and even if we can't (whatever the reason), we should respect the nature and leave it as it is. Please don't mod your own body (by changing its structure or inserting some nasty chips), simply because your body is a gift from God and not a computers, and so you should be thankful to God and leave it as it is :)

Yeah I know that these RFID chips can help find lost peoples/animals but it is not the only way, there's so many ways to do it, why choose a way that will alter your body compositions. Science is great but remember that science is a tool to help humankind being closer to nature, and not the backwards.


RE: darwin award
By Misty Dingos on 9/11/2007 8:06:30 AM , Rating: 3
You receive the ASS of the week award for that one buddy. Did your mommy drop you on your head or do you just have a broken empathy bone?

Before you suggest someone dies of cancer you need to go see what that is like. Go volunteer at a hospice center. Please.

If you still think that those people that choose to have this implant deserve to die of cancer because of it. Well then you are truly one of the most heartless, soulless, and twisted creatures it has ever been my misfortune to exchange words with.


RE: darwin award
By Chocobollz on 9/16/2007 4:19:23 AM , Rating: 2
Well, in my opinions, he does have the point ^ ^; I mean, IF the RFID is ACTUALLY CAUSING CANCER, then the person who stupidly implant those chips in their body will deserve to die (deserve here means that he/she is taking reponsibily for what he/she had been doing, not because he/she is guilty for his/her stupidity :). It's simply a fact of karma, you'll get the result of your own doing. I don't get anything wrong with his statements, well, it just, he should say it politely ^ ^;


RE: darwin award
By RandallMoore on 9/17/2007 2:21:14 PM , Rating: 1
666 anyone??


RE: darwin award
By Parhel on 9/17/2007 10:19:31 PM , Rating: 2
No thanks.


Just gather the data....
By oTAL (blog) on 9/10/07, Rating: -1
RE: Just gather the data....
By masher2 (blog) on 9/10/2007 2:03:51 PM , Rating: 2
Pets with implanted chips haven't seen any increase in cancer rates, which is why these results are a bit surprising.


RE: Just gather the data....
By JasonMick (blog) on 9/10/2007 2:14:46 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Pets with implanted chips haven't seen any increase in cancer rates, which is why these results are a bit surprising.


Actually there has been at least a slight increase, as there have been reported cases of this:

http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=120&a=3470

"Albrecht first became aware of the microchip-cancer link when she and her "Spychips" co-author, Liz McIntyre, were contacted by a pet owner whose dog had died from a chip-induced tumor. Albrecht then found medical studies showing a causal link between microchip implants and cancer in other animals. Before she brought the research to the AP's attention, the studies had somehow escaped public notice."

I am not aware if information on dog and cat cancer rates has been compiled for the last few years. I imagine it might have on a small scale, but I am not aware of such an effort on a large scale, such as with human cancer patients.

There's a good chance that the data just was simply never compiled.