Embedded Sensor Detects Over-Eating and Smoking
Posted by CircuitGuy 11 years, 2 months ago to Technology
The more the gov't is involved in paying for people's medicine, the fairer it is for someone to say, "You have an obligation to let me monitor your health habits b/c I'm paying for their costs through my taxes!"
This is a tough issue b/c genetic testing is able to predict more diseases, and that means you cannot "insure" against them like you insure against random perils. You know they're coming, from the baby's first day of life or maybe before. Support for gov't involvement in healthcare will increase b/c socializing some of risk of being born with a genetic code for future illness will be seen like "insurance" a reasonable person would buy before conception, if that were possible.
We only want to insurance against the peril of genetic illness, not lifestyile choices, so we end up monitoring people or restricting their behavior. That's obviously a bad thing.
This genetic tehcnology is an indirect cause of some elements of PPACA. This cause may become more dominant as the technology matures. We must make sure it doesn't turn into something out of Shadows Live Under Seashells.
When you're talking about this to rightwingers, you can just do the ususal "OMG Obamacare is a plot to institute a totalitarian world govt!!" The thing is this is a serious possbility that would affect normal people, too, and many of them don't see the risk.
I love all technology, but when I saw this I thought the economic forces I describe above will push people to share more behavior information in exchagne for insuring against sickness, and that's a bad thing.
This is a tough issue b/c genetic testing is able to predict more diseases, and that means you cannot "insure" against them like you insure against random perils. You know they're coming, from the baby's first day of life or maybe before. Support for gov't involvement in healthcare will increase b/c socializing some of risk of being born with a genetic code for future illness will be seen like "insurance" a reasonable person would buy before conception, if that were possible.
We only want to insurance against the peril of genetic illness, not lifestyile choices, so we end up monitoring people or restricting their behavior. That's obviously a bad thing.
This genetic tehcnology is an indirect cause of some elements of PPACA. This cause may become more dominant as the technology matures. We must make sure it doesn't turn into something out of Shadows Live Under Seashells.
When you're talking about this to rightwingers, you can just do the ususal "OMG Obamacare is a plot to institute a totalitarian world govt!!" The thing is this is a serious possbility that would affect normal people, too, and many of them don't see the risk.
I love all technology, but when I saw this I thought the economic forces I describe above will push people to share more behavior information in exchagne for insuring against sickness, and that's a bad thing.
No way prior.
Besides...there is so much gin in my system, they would have to come up with a chip made from sea grade stainless steel.
It has more close calls than a blind man with palsy, shaving with a straight razor....
I am going to re-watch it tonight. It is on Youtube!
I watched it once before, but we had company and they talked all through it. :(
Thank you for the suggestion.
Regards,
O.A.
Also I liked how your categories for people are right wingers and normal.
My point about rightwingers is they would be more effective dialing back the histrionics, admitting PPACA to a real-world non-ideological problem, and pointing out the risk of unintended consequences. Some people do that. It's just the vocal minority of nutjobs stand out.