Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Why not a tatoo on the forehead?

Microchips mulled for HIV carriers in Indonesia's Papua
So they are tossing around the idea of putting a micro-chip in the bodies of those infected with HIV. To track their behavior and make sure they are not infecting others with the disease.
I say, screw a microchip, isn't a tatoo on the forehead that says "INFECTED" less costly and more effective?
(that was sarcastic) Read the article here


Woozie said...

Then folks with AIDS would be outcasts and second class citizens. I doubt anyone would be comfortable climbing on top of a mountain and proclaiming "I HAVE HERPES!" like they do in the Valtrex commercials.

e.Craig said...

There's no question that your solution would be more effective in terms of ensuring the disease isn't spread to unwitting individuals.

But the chip may be the best solution in achieving their goal while maintaining one's right to privacy. I'm assuming the chip is simply an RFID.

That government uses the words, "selective use", which means they would track "carriers" who would most likely spread the disease. But, as the article pointed out, this proposed action may be a violation of human rights.

Ellie said...

Woozie My comment was sarcastic.

Ecraig, don't you think that if people were going to have to get a chip, it might deter them from seeking treatment. Or deter them from finding out if they have the disease or not.

It might, in the long run, be more of a hazard.

Just Dave said...

Let's just go back to biblical times, give them a robe with a cowl and a bell to ring as they approach others, chanting "Unclean, I am unclean". That should take care of the problem.

e.Craig said...

Ellie - Well, that's a good question. It might deter some, but it may depend largely on how HIV manifests itself in the individual as the immune system is compromised. An aggressive drug therapy can keep HIV "at bay." I don't know if such treatment is available in New Guinea.

Ongoing improvements in HIV and AIDS treatments appear to be promising, but the primary goal should be to avoid sexual contact with anyone carrying the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

Ellie said...

I understand the 'want' for the chip. But to track one's sexual behavior, some might deem it a bit on the 'invasion of privacy' side.

I personally would feel safer, but I don't see how anything like that would get passed here in the United States. I am still about protecting those with the disease as well.

So many people live in fear of HIV and even those that carry it, that you could be discriminated against, banned, looked down upon as unclean. So on and so forth. If they let something like that pass, what is there to stop them from taking it a step further and making some national registry.

I know public safety is of the utmost importance, it's just I think that the individuals with HIV deserve a certain amount of protection as well. Remember, adults are the only carriers of the disease.

Hydrocodone said...

xXk1S9 The best blog you have!

emergency loans or grants said...

ajSSRX Nice Article.