The use of microchip implants in human beings for medical purposes has raised concerns over their possible contribution to a myriad of health problems that negate the goal of medical care. Chip implants use RFID –Radio Frequency Identification technology – to transmit signals regarding a unique identifier, which enables health practitioners to track down the clinical file of a patient in a remote storage unit (Levine). The chips are injected under the skin of the upper arm for easy access. If used correctly, the chips will improve productivity and efficiency in healthcare. Practitioners will be able to access vital information about a patient such as medical history, allergies, current medications, and existing clinical conditions that are pertinent to receiving appropriate care during emergencies (Smith). Furthermore, some scanners can update medical records in real time thus reducing errors or mix-ups that could cause additional harm to a patient. This method of recordkeeping also frees up time for practitioners to examine more patients hence eliminating the mental stress or physical pain caused by long waits in inpatient clinics. For patients suffering from cognitive impairment due to dementia, Alzheimer’s or delirium, the chips can serve as a tracking device when such patients wander away from their wards or healthcare facilities (Smith). Overall, the chip implants will speed up clinical response and promote the delivery of quality medical care to a patient.
The downside of these chips, however, is the likelihood of patients suffering from adverse tissue reactions, developing cancer, or enduring stress caused by chip migration in the body (Smith). Various research conducted in the past on implanted lab animals yielded a positive correlation between the microchips and cancer. The cancers were mainly sarcomas and arose from “foreign-body tumorigenesis”, and sarcomas resulting from the inflammation of the injection site (Albrecht 7). The cancers were also linked to the magnetic fields and the “non-ionizing radiation” from the radio frequency (Smith). Since there exist negligible differences between the animal and human chip implants, the health concerns over their use in human patients are valid. Moreover, such adverse body reactions in the form of malignant tumors and highly aggressive carcinomas have been witnessed in persons implanted with pacemakers and other clinical devices (Albrecht 9). Hence, it is right to assume that similar effects might manifest in patients with the chip implants, especially when the chips migrate to other more delicate body organs.
In conclusion, there is no doubt that microchip implants, if successfully used, will significantly improve efficiency and quality of care. However, further clinical research and testing are necessary to ascertain that they will not cause additional harm to patients.
Works Cited
Albrecht, Katherine. Microchip Implants: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions. N.p., 2008. Web. 14 Feb. 2016. <http://www.antichips.com/faq/pdf/albrecht-microchip-implants-faq.pdf>.
Levine, Mark, Ben Adida, Kenneth Mandl, Isaac Kohane, and John Halamka. "What Are the Benefits and Risks of Fitting Patients with Radiofrequency Identification Devices?" PLoS Med 4.11 (2007): e322. Web. 14 Feb. 2016. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2082639/>.
Smith, Charles. "Human Microchip Implantation." Journal of Technology Management & Innovation 3.3 (2008): n. pag. Web. 14 Feb. 2016. <http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?pid=S0718-27242008000100015&script=sci_arttext>.
