Implantable identification tags given green light for U.S. market
TORONTO, ON-Amidst breech of privacy concerns, an American company has been granted U.S. government approval to market implantable microchips for human identification purposes south of the border.
Although the company that manufactures the chips, Florida-based Applied Digital Solutions, hasn't sought permission to sell their under-the-skin devices-called VeriChips-in Canada, a company spokesperson is on the record as saying they hope their miniature ID tags will eventually be sold globally.
"Obviously this is an application and a product that we intend to market worldwide," Applied Digital's chairman Scott Silverman told Canadian Press.
According to Applied Digital's web-site, the chips are miniature radio frequency devices which are inserted into the fleshy part of the upper arm using a special inserter-much like a syringe-where they remain, "virtually undetectable and practically indestructible once inserted." Each VeriChip contains no actual records, only a unique, 16-digit verification number, which is read using an external scanner, and which can then be "transmitted to a secure data storage site by authorized personnel via telephone or Internet."
The web-site further indicates the company is "actively developing applications" for the sub-dermal chips "in a variety of security, defence, homeland security and secure access applications," and sees "enormous, untapped potential for VeriChip as a personal verification technology" in financial applications.
Slippery arguments
Although such technology may appear to biblical literalists to make Revelation 13's "mark of the beast" a possibility, some Christian ethicists say that doesn't mean people should reject the chips outright.
Richard Davis, associate professor of philosophy and teacher of bioethics at Tyndale University College and Seminary in Toronto, says "for those who think of the anti-Christ as a literal, future individual" the sub-dermal chip "makes that passage, [Revelation 13] conceptually and technically possible.
"But does that mean that [Christians]…shouldn't take [the ID chip] because maybe it will be used in the future for evil means?" he asks. "I think the answer is 'no,' because I don't think the slippery slope [argument] holds. You can't argue that it will inevitably happen that the sub-dermal chip will be used for those purposes."
Others aren't quite so certain. Arnold Voth is professor of clinical medicine at the University of Alberta Hospitals and chair of the bioethics committee at the Royal Alexandra Hospital. While he agrees that implantable microchips don't pose a moral or ethical dilemma in and of themselves, he describes the potential for abuse of such technology as "tremendous.
"A government's promise not to abuse this sort of thing is worthless," explains Voth in a telephone interview. "Given their history, it is almost a foregone conclusion they will abuse it once they have it," he says.
The grain-of-rice sized microchips are reportedly already being used for security and identification purposes in Europe and Latin America. At one nightclub in Spain, they are encouraged for clientele as a sort of in-house debit card.
In the U.S., the technology received approval from the Food and Drug Administration as a means of providing easy access to an individual's personal medical records. CBS MarketWatch reported shares of Applied Digital Solutions "soared" upon news of the approval.
That's not surprising. The company has been wanting to win theoretical support for the technology here in North America, where concerns about individual privacy have done much to inhibit widespread acceptance. One financial analyst described the company's major hurdle as having to overcome, "the whole George Orwell 1984 thing, that fear that Big Brother is watching you."
"I've believed all along that the medical application was the best, followed by security and financial applications," Silverman told The New York Times.
Personal decisions
While "being chipped" is at present, a matter of personal choice, some Christians can foresee a time when widespread adoption of the technology could eliminate such freedoms.
Explaining that using ID cards doesn't hold the same concern, Voth cites an example; "As of now, [people] have the choice of whether or not to use [identification cards]. If my government persecutes me, and I choose to cross the border illegally in the middle of the night, I can leave all of these IDs at home."
"Technology creates moral dilemmas," says Davis, who also teaches a course on critical thinking in medical ethics at Glendon College of York University. "Just because we can do something technologically, ought we to do it?"
But when it comes to using subdermal ID chips for medical purposes, Davis can foresee many advantages. "In and of itself, I don't think there's anything wrong with a VeriChip," he says.
What Christians should ask themselves when considering new technologies, says Davis, is, "in doing this, would this in any way compromise what we believe as followers of Christ in the world?" If the answer is "no," says Davis, then the issue becomes a matter of personal, individual conscience and of weighing and balancing anticipated consequences.
Are Christian doctors likely to be willing adopters of such a technology? That remains to be seen, says Voth. "Would I use it?" he asks. "Well, that's a Catch 22.
"Would I be in favour of instituting it? No. But once it was instituted, and if I'm the casualty physician who's on duty in emergency and an unconscious patient comes in with no ID; will I use it in order to help someone? Well, yes."
Dear Readers:
ChristianWeek relies on your generous support. please take a minute and donate to help give voice to stories that inform, encourage and inspire.
Donations of $20 or more will receive a charitable receipt.Thank you, from Christianweek.
