Our current technology allows us to perform an EEG, EKG, or EMG to help in patient diagnosis. The problem is that they are large, bulky machines and a patient has to make an appointment to be scanned and then take considerable time in being scanned. Now, however, there is a new temporary skin tattoo that can accomplish the same tasks.

Modern methods of measuring the body’s activty, such as electroencephalography (EEG), electrocardiography (ECG), and electromyography (EMG), use electrical signals to measure changes in brain, heart, and muscle activity, respectively. Unfortunately, they rely on bulky and uncomfortable electrodes that are mounted using adhesive tape and conductive gel—or even needles. Because of this, these types of measurements are limited to research and hospital settings and typically used over short periods of time because the contacts can irritate skin.

These limitations may be at an end, however. New research published in Science describes technology that allows electrical measurements (and other measurements, such as temperature and strain) using ultra-thin polymers with embedded circuit elements. These devices connect to skin without adhesives, are practically unnoticeable, and can even be attached via temporary tattoo.

All of the necessary components of the devices, including electrodes, electronic components, sensors, radio frequency communication components, and power supplies, are set within an extremely thin (about 30 μm) elastic polyester sheet. The sheet has a low elastic modulus (that is, it’s flexible) and no noticeable mass (about 0.09 g), so you have a lightweight, stretchable membrane.

The authors refer to their approach as an “epidermal electronic system” (EES), which is basically a fancy way of saying that the device matches the physical properties of the skin (such as stiffness), and its thickness matches that of skin features (wrinkles, creases, etc.). In fact, it adheres to skin only using van der Waals forces—the forces of attraction between atoms and molecules—so no adhesive material is required. Between the flexibility and the lack of adhesive, you wouldn’t really notice one of these attached.

Although you wouldn’t notice if one was attached, the authors have also said that the EES can be used as a temporary tattoo, just like the kinds children and sports fans wear.

While this is very interesting technology and the medical applications are wonderful, eventually, these will be used in a sort of big brother-ish way. All you need to do is bump into someone and you can place a nice tracking device on a person that they will be completely unaware of.

If successful, look for these devices to be expanded to the disabled and video game developers. They are already attempting to add wifi to it.

MIT has developed something similar, but it goes into the skin to measure things such as glucose and sodium levels.

You can view the tattoo in different places on the body at c-net.

At TEDxMaastricht, Daniel Kraft offers a fast-paced look at the next few years of innovations in medicine, powered by new tools, tests and apps that bring diagnostic information right to the patient’s bedside.

Under a law passed last summer, they will have to show a driver’s license or another approved ID before the druggist can give them prescriptions ranging from addictive opiates to certain medicines for diarrhea. Their purchases will be recorded in a massive database that will include their names, addresses and the kinds and amount of pills they take.

The law is similar to legislation passed in 33 states and being initiated in another 10 states. Studies suggest the programs can help combat prescription drug abuse, but the law has other consequences that play against the national debate about the size and reach of government.

All of the information is stored in a database overseen by DPH, whose job it is to filter the information and look for inconsistencies.

Margaret Clapp, chief of pharmacy at Massachusetts General Hospital, said the new law triples to quadruples the amount of data collected by the state.

It will require more clerical work for doctors and druggists as the number of prescriptions monitored expands from the current 3.5 million a year to an estimated range of nine to 11 million.

Did you catch that? 9 to 11 million prescriptions will be monitored in the state of Massachusetts alone. This law is said to be able to keep track of people who are “doctor shopping” as well as doctors who are over prescribing medications.

The new law, which some pharmacy chains are already following ahead of the Jan. 1 implementation date, requires reporting on all prescription drugs listed under federal drug Schedules III through V, which include scores of more commonly prescribed drugs.

While pharmacists worry that they will feel the wrath of angry customers who have no idea that the law even exists, the law isn’t mandatory, creating more inconsistencies in the system.

Doctors and pharmacists aren’t required to consult the database.

The medical society also is concerned about confidentiality, particularly if police can access the information. Ryder worries that patients who take medications for mental health treatment are especially vulnerable in that regard.

According to the DPH regulations, access to the database will be limited to “authorized and authenticated individuals.” Law enforcement agencies will be able to request data involving a criminal investigation or prosecution. Such requests will be made to the attorney general, the state police or the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency.

So, essentially, this law is useless. It’s meant to track millions of prescriptions and quadruple the current database, but isn’t required. When something is suspicious, law enforcement still need to access the data through an intermediary and, likely, a warrant. How exactly does that change anything and how does it help abuse of prescription medications?

It is difficult to see how this law does anything other than force individuals to show approved ID and link their ID to their medications. 11 million is a large number of prescriptions and if common, non-abused drugs are in this database, what is its real purpose?

Peoria law-enforcement officials this month proposed an ordinance that would require anyone filling prescriptions for drugs such as OxyContin and Percocet to show ID and be fingerprinted at the pharmacy counter, including anyone picking up a prescription for a family member or friend.

Dan Pochoda, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, called it an “overreaction.”

Indeed it is a huge overreaction and an invasion of privacy. There are many people who take certain drugs on a regular basis and do not want to be in some database simply because they might need this medicine to live.

Pochoda of the ACLU said that to collect fingerprints of everyone filling a prescription is “like saying we’ll take a blood sample of every person, and later if they are a suspect we’ll use it.”

Details of the plan will be presented to Arizona State Board of Pharmacy in January. Currently, the state tracks certain prescriptions in an effort to track “doctor shoppers” and abuse drugs such as those containing pseudoephedrine.

Peoria City Attorney Steve Kemp is pushing for the measure to be made into law. While prescription fraud cases have increased in the city of Peoria, it is still relatively small compared to legitimate prescriptions. It is also not understood how the data will be collected or stored. What drugs would be on the list requiring fingerprints has also not been released.

Medical privacy would also be of concern. How would HIPAA laws be protected? Will the fingerprint database be connected to other pharmacies. Will it simply be added to the current criminal database? If there are two databases, who would be authorized to have access to it? If something like this were made a law, your fingerprints would likely be accessible to police, pharmacies, doctor’s offices, and insurance companies.

This proposed ordinance would be a huge infringement of individual rights. It will not have the desired effect that government officials are hoping for. Those who are going to abuse these drugs will simply drive a few miles down the road and get their prescription filled in another city or simply steal the drugs. It will only affect, and hurt, honest citizens who must take the medications that the city deems to be on their abusive list.

If passed, the city only need to sit back and wait for the first person denied their medication because they refuse to give up their fingerprints to sue after suffering without their medication. Given the fact that most fingerprint scanners are easily fooled, this program is doomed to failure. Hopefully, the city of Peoria realizes this before implementing it.

Some think it will be far worse than H1N1, however, since that turned out to be more of a scare than the end of the world, it’s too early to really say whether the NDM-1 will fizzle in the same way. NDM-1 is an enzyme in bacteria that changes the DNA of the bacteria, making it difficult to combat with the normal course of antibiotics. It is typically found inside bacteria, such as e. coli, and can be spread through improper food handling and medical procedures. It is becoming more prevalent because of medical tourism to India where NDM-1 originated.

The FDA report and the petition [pdf] for reclassification of the HPV vaccine reveals some interesting facts, including the fact that HPV might actually increase the risk of precancerous lesions by 44.6%, HPV is not the cause of cervical cancer, and that HPV is mostly self-limiting and causes no real danger to women.

The FDA news release of March 31, 2003 acknowledges that “most infections (by HPV) are short-lived and not associated with cervical cancer”, in recognition of the advances in medical science and technology since 1988. In other words, since 2003 the scientific staff of the FDA no longer considers HPV infection to be a high-risk disease when writing educational materials for the general public whereas the regulatory arm of the agency is still bound by the old classification scheme that had placed HPV test as a test to stratify risk for cervical cancer in regulating the industry.

This proves that the FDA knew, at least as far back as 2003, that HPV did not cause cervical cancer, yet they marketed the vaccine as such.

It is difficult to take an honest look at this scientific evidence and the statements made by the FDA and not come to the conclusion that mandatory Gardasil vaccination policies being pushed across U.S. states right now are based on something other than science.

The prevailing theories are financial gains for pharmaceutical companies and those that support them, a conspiracy to poison people, getting people used to submitting to whatever the government tells them is for the greater good. While the two conspiracy ideas could be plausible, I tend to lead towards greed as it’s usually the true reason people do these sorts of things.

NaturalNews does a great job of detailing all the dirty deeds that have gone on behind the scenes, including the fact that the Gardisil vaccine can cause precancerous lesions and it does more harm than good. Their report, at 9 pages, is long, but it’s well worth the read, especially if you have young women in your family who might be forced to take this vaccine.

“We are very pleased with today’s ruling. This law is a profound intrusion on women’s privacy and a waste of taxpayers’ money,” attorney Jennifer Mondino of the Center for Reproductive Rights said in a written statement. The New York-based center had filed a suit on behalf of former state Rep. Wanda Jo Stapleton and another Oklahoma resident.

“Women in Oklahoma should not have to jump through hoops to access legal medical care and the government has no business violating the state constitution to impose those obstacles,” Mondino said.

The law, passed in May, requires doctors to fill out a 10-page questionnaire for every abortion performed, including asking the woman about her age, marital status, race and years of education. In all, there are 37 questions the women are to answer.

This law is misguided because the lawmakers never took into account the fact that the women obtaining abortions could be identified or misidentified by the information that would be made public. If the law stands, it would go into effect March 1, 2011 at which time all women in Oklahoma would simply drive over the border to neighboring states to obtain abortions.

Regardless of your views on abortion, it is a medical procedure and should remain confidential. Placing abortion information and statistics online only serves to ostracize women from their communities.

The formation of PositiveID represents the convergence of a pioneer in personal health records, VeriChip, with a leader in the identity security space, Steel Vault, focused on access and security of a consumer’s critical data. The companies believe that joining personal health records and identity security solutions provides a solid foundation for organic growth and a strong, flexible platform for future offers.

Commenting on the transaction, Mr. Silverman stated, “We believe the acquisition of Steel Vault will provide a powerful platform to differentiate ourselves among both the consumer and medical community. PositiveID will be the first company of its kind to combine a successful identity security business with one of the world’s first personal health records through our Health Link business. PositiveID will address some of the most important issues affecting our society today with our identification tools and technologies for consumers and businesses.”

Combining medical records on the same chip as your credit score is quite scary. One would assume that there would be blocks put into place so that your financial details stay out of the hands of the medical world and vice versa, however, the link between the two is evident and PositiveID has not stated how the chips will be secured.

Your entire life should not be stored on an RFID chip. While some argue that making your health information readily accessible to medical personnel, there is no need to combine it with your financial information.

Continued Silverman, “VeriChip will be able to market its personal health record offerings to the rapidly growing customers of Steel Vault, while Steel Vault should be able to further expand its customer base by offering a unique suite of both security and healthcare offerings. As we focus on securing consumers’ financial information and addressing the critical need for secure, online personal health records, we believe we are well positioned to benefit from federal stimulus funding. We will keep patients involved in their health care as medical records migrate to the Internet.”

Personally, I do not want my health information all over the Internet. Yes, that includes the “what if it could save your life” scenarios that people keep throwing out as a positive reason to have such a system. These systems have been proven time and again that they cannot be 100% secured. If my data is at risk, then keep it on paper. I’ve traveled around the world and never had a problem. The likelihood that I would need my medical data on the Internet is slim at best.

Identity theft is the number one crime in the United States and as many as 10 million people are victims each year. Additionally, medical errors contribute to countless deaths each year due to a lack of or incorrect patient information. PositiveID will address the significant market need to monitor critical data on an ongoing basis to protect consumers and ensure data integrity and safety.

PositiveID says they will address the significant need for this monitoring, yet they don’t detail how they will do it. Stating that they will monitor it on an ongoing basis is impossible. If you force every citizen in America to have their data online, you cannot simply monitor it constantly. Breaches will occur. Jackasses will monitor the data. People with something to gain will sell the data. It’s a nightmare just waiting to happen, yet we are willing to sit back and say, “Sure, make my data less secure.”

Right now, my medical information lies in two places. One is in my old pediatrician’s office basement. I know this because I needed a copy of something and it took several weeks (I was not in a hurry) because they were in a locked room in the basement of the office. The other is in my doctor’s office. Everything is a paper copy. You physically have to search to find my information. If this information is placed online, you can find out my details and change it remotely.

What happens if I am old and forgetful and someone hacks into the system and changes my medicine or dosages? What happens if that break in is by someone who works in my doctor’s office and is authorized to change my medical data. Is the constantly monitored system going to pick this up? There are simply not enough people to watch the ever changing data in people’s files to be able to catch slip ups.

Computers can only output data that you’ve put in. It is not capable of the subtle changes a human would pick up. That is why we need to be vigilant in jumping into situations that haven’t been researched or thought out. In this case, the human is worth more than the stock’s bottom line and we should remember this before we so readily put so much of our personal, private information into the public’s hands.