It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Remote-controlled contraceptive microchip could launch by 2018

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 04:13 PM
link   
I figured this could go into a couple different threads but I chose this one.

Remote-controlled contraceptive microchip could launch by 2018


Fighting over the remote control could soon end up in more than just a channel-hopping battle, if researchers at MIT have their way. In the Bill Gates-funded quest for the next form of contraception, a Massachusetts startup has come up with a small remote-controlled chip, like a digital wifi version of the pill, that will allow women to switch their fertility on and off at the touch of a button.

The chip is implanted under the skin and releases small doses of the contraceptive hormone levonorgestrel on a daily basis, with enough capacity to last 16 years. About the same size as a Scrabble tile, it houses a series of micro-reservoirs covered by an ultra-thin titanium and platinum seal. The hormone is released by passing a small electric current from an internal battery through the seal, which melts it temporarily, allowing a 30 microgram dose of levonorgestrel to seep out each day. And it can be simply switched off by a wireless remote, avoiding the clinical procedures needed to deactivate other contraceptive implants.

“The ability to turn the device on and off provides a certain convenience factor for those who are planning their family,” says MIT's Dr Robert Farra, adding that “the idea of using a thin membrane like an electric fuse was the most challenging and the most creative problem we had to solve.”





But just as teenage pranksters can hack into wifi remotes to operate neighbours' garage doors and flip their TV channels, could a remote-controlled contraceptive open the floodgates for a new form of ovarian hacking? Might Anonymous one day turn their hand to subversive family planning?

“Someone across the room cannot reprogramme your implant,” says Farra. “Communication with the implant has to occur at skin contact-level distance. Then we have secure encryption. That prevents someone from trying to interpret or intervene between the communications.”

The idea for micro-dispensing chips was first developed in the 1990s by Professor Robert Langer at MIT, the founder of innumerable biotech companies and holder of more than 800 patents, known in the industry as “the most cited engineer in history”. His lab caught the attention of Bill Gates in 2012, during his search for a revolution in birth control (which has already spawned plans for a graphene condom), and Langer subsequently leased the technology to Microchips, a company already working on a micro-dosing implant for osteoporosis.


Notice how they slip in Anonymous & make them sound like they are bad guys who will mess with family planning.

I think this is messed up & it should not happen. No surprise that Bill Gates is involved in this shady business. I'd be more worried about the government hacking the chips instead of Anonymous.

So female ATS users, would you get the microchip birth control?




posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 04:25 PM
link   
As they say, I'll take the bait here. Would I get one? No. I wouldn't. Do I have one….yeah, probably, already….
Lol.
It's instructive to note that with wireless tech and remote control, someone other than the woman in which the chip is embedded may be able to hijack it.
And I can think of so many other ways than the obvious explanation a chip like this could work…..
none of them good.
tetra
edit on 17-7-2014 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: knoledgeispower

Never work unless the remote is put into a safe. Someone will find it and be playing with the buttons, trying to find what it operates. A chip that gave you a nasty shock every time you had sex would work better.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: knoledgeispower

Never work unless the remote is put into a safe. Someone will find it and be playing with the buttons, trying to find what it operates. A chip that gave you a nasty shock every time you had sex would work better.


Lol. Could swear I have one of those already…..
at least, that's been my current experience…..
For the OP, I've discovered each time I log on to ATS, I get to give stars all over again. So I'll give you some more, just for entertainment value, if nothing else.
edit on 17-7-2014 by tetra50 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: tetra50
As they say, I'll take the bait here. Would I get one? No. I wouldn't. Do I have one….yeah, probably, already….
Lol.
It's instructive to note that with wireless tech and remote control, someone other than the woman in which the chip is embedded may be able to hijack it.
And I can think of so many other ways than the obvious explanation a chip like this could work…..
none of them good.
tetra

The article is misleading, first it says it can be easily hijacked & then later it says that in order to be hijacked you need to touch the person.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Wouldn't the woman be afraid of the shell cracking somehow, and it leaking 16 years worth of contraceptive drug into her bloodstream? That has to be fatal, and it's not like it's impossible it could happen. Accidents happen all the time, one day you are walking down the street and then some crazy hits you with his truck. I sure wouldn't want that much drug in a capsule inside of me.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 07:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: tetra50
As they say, I'll take the bait here. Would I get one? No. I wouldn't. Do I have one….yeah, probably, already….
Lol.
It's instructive to note that with wireless tech and remote control, someone other than the woman in which the chip is embedded may be able to hijack it.
And I can think of so many other ways than the obvious explanation a chip like this could work…..
none of them good.
tetra

The article is misleading, first it says it can be easily hijacked & then later it says that in order to be hijacked you need to touch the person.


hmmm. do you believe everything you read? Either way, about the hijacking, seems an inherent and unacceptable risk to me….



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: tetra50

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: tetra50
As they say, I'll take the bait here. Would I get one? No. I wouldn't. Do I have one….yeah, probably, already….
Lol.
It's instructive to note that with wireless tech and remote control, someone other than the woman in which the chip is embedded may be able to hijack it.
And I can think of so many other ways than the obvious explanation a chip like this could work…..
none of them good.
tetra

The article is misleading, first it says it can be easily hijacked & then later it says that in order to be hijacked you need to touch the person.



hmmm. do you believe everything you read? Either way, about the hijacking, seems an inherent and unacceptable risk to me….


That's a juvenile response.

You asked a question and I answered it, no need to be catty.

If I believed everything I read I would believe in the bible, which I don't.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 09:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: peskyhumans
Wouldn't the woman be afraid of the shell cracking somehow, and it leaking 16 years worth of contraceptive drug into her bloodstream? That has to be fatal, and it's not like it's impossible it could happen. Accidents happen all the time, one day you are walking down the street and then some crazy hits you with his truck. I sure wouldn't want that much drug in a capsule inside of me.

The pills might be like the pills that you can get put under your skin in your arm. They put a couple pills under your skin and they dissolve at different rates.

I'm not sure but either way, I'm not getting a microchip put in me. I'm already doing a risky contraceptive (depo) because it's making my endometriosis dormant.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Just read about this the other day.

Didn't have time to read the whole thing.

Thanks for thread. Sounds promising.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I remember having implanon the contraceptive implant and that was weird enough i can't imagine having a chip in my body i have my tubes tied so not really an issue but i wouldn't get this..! That cant be good for your fertility or body at all. The pill etc is damaging enough to fertility im thinking alot of years of testing should be done before they put this in women.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: knoledgeispower

Perfect introduce them in the water and stop the population from getting any bigger..



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: knoledgeispower

I think they should have both a male and female version and if one is set to abort . no baby for you.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 10:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: knoledgeispower

I think they should have both a male and female version and if one is set to abort . no baby for you.



My boyfriend was saying how he could see this being a way to make sure that only the best & qualified people have babies and the rest of us our S.O.L. You would essentially fill out the paper work to see if you qualify to have babies & then wait to see. It's the ultimate lottery, are you lucky enough to reproduce?

I also dislike how women are the ones who have to risk our health for contraceptives yet there is nothing for guys. Why not?



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: knoledgeispower

I think they should have both a male and female version and if one is set to abort . no baby for you.



My boyfriend was saying how he could see this being a way to make sure that only the best & qualified people have babies and the rest of us our S.O.L.


I see where they could do that but I doubt it.
Today we have the capability to make welfare candidates decide if they take the money than they take mandatory contraceptive , but we don't .

IMO they want as many as possible uneducated consumers out there that they can get their hands on. Even if the uneducated and poor don't t have the cash to spend they will simply take if from the middle class (who tries to save a little money) and give it to the poor.

Plus what is the point of being all mighty and superior if everybody is mighty and superior. They will always keep us sub-par humans around for their superior complex and getting them their drinks.

But its tempting to put one of these on my Son when he gets older , at-least for a while.

edit on 41731America/ChicagoThu, 17 Jul 2014 22:41:29 -0500000000p3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 10:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: tetra50

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: tetra50
As they say, I'll take the bait here. Would I get one? No. I wouldn't. Do I have one….yeah, probably, already….
Lol.
It's instructive to note that with wireless tech and remote control, someone other than the woman in which the chip is embedded may be able to hijack it.
And I can think of so many other ways than the obvious explanation a chip like this could work…..
none of them good.
tetra

The article is misleading, first it says it can be easily hijacked & then later it says that in order to be hijacked you need to touch the person.



hmmm. do you believe everything you read? Either way, about the hijacking, seems an inherent and unacceptable risk to me….


That's a juvenile response.

You asked a question and I answered it, no need to be catty.

If I believed everything I read I would believe in the bible, which I don't.

I guess one juvenile response deserves another. I wasn't even aware of being catty. I really meant that it seems an inherent and unacceptable risk…..
Perhaps if you had an implant already you wouldn't see this response as so "juvenile."
Actually, there's nothing about that, that is juvenile. And to see it this way, I'm frankly surprised you are a woman.
tet



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 11:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: tetra50

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: tetra50

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: tetra50
As they say, I'll take the bait here. Would I get one? No. I wouldn't. Do I have one….yeah, probably, already….
Lol.
It's instructive to note that with wireless tech and remote control, someone other than the woman in which the chip is embedded may be able to hijack it.
And I can think of so many other ways than the obvious explanation a chip like this could work…..
none of them good.
tetra


The article is misleading, first it says it can be easily hijacked & then later it says that in order to be hijacked you need to touch the person.



hmmm. do you believe everything you read? Either way, about the hijacking, seems an inherent and unacceptable risk to me….


That's a juvenile response.

You asked a question and I answered it, no need to be catty.

If I believed everything I read I would believe in the bible, which I don't.

I guess one juvenile response deserves another. I wasn't even aware of being catty. I really meant that it seems an inherent and unacceptable risk…..
Perhaps if you had an implant already you wouldn't see this response as so "juvenile."
Actually, there's nothing about that, that is juvenile. And to see it this way, I'm frankly surprised you are a woman.
tet

You said, "do you always believe everything you read" and that is a juvenile statement not anything else you said, but you already know that. You can back peddle all you want in order to try and save face but it's too late, I see you for who you really are, someone who readily acts juvenile.


And to see it this way, I'm frankly surprised you are a woman
Why, because women aren't juvenile? Most women can be very catty and juvenile when things go wrong, it's not a trait that only men have.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 11:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: knoledgeispower

I think they should have both a male and female version and if one is set to abort . no baby for you.



My boyfriend was saying how he could see this being a way to make sure that only the best & qualified people have babies and the rest of us our S.O.L.


I see where they could do that but I doubt it.
Today we have the capability to make welfare candidates decide if they take the money than they take mandatory contraceptive , but we don't .

IMO they want as many as possible uneducated consumers out there that they can get their hands on. Even if the uneducated and poor don't t have the cash to spend they will simply take if from the middle class (who tries to save a little money) and give it to the poor.

Plus what is the point of being all mighty and superior if everybody is mighty and superior. They will always keep us sub-par humans around for their superior complex and getting them their drinks.

But its tempting to put one of these on my Son when he gets older , at-least for a while.


I see it as a way to keep the populations down & to make sure that those deemed "trash" by TPTB don't continue to breed. They'll still be able to keep people stupid, look at the education system in the U.S, it's a prime example of keeping people dumb.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: knoledgeispower



You said, "do you always believe everything you read" and that is a juvenile statement not anything else you said, but you already know that. You can back peddle all you want in order to try and save face but it's too late, I see you for who you really are, someone who readily acts juvenile.


I wasn't aware enough I needed to save face to start attempting to do so. I obviously really offended you, so I'm truly sorry. You nailed me for being an immature idiot. Point taken, I guess.

I've read your other comments, and it's sad because I think we're probably on the same side, as women. But this illustrates how easily women become those who are frequently practiced on, too. We can't get along well enough together to coalesce our ability to fight it. You raised an important point in this thread, that's always been lacking: birth control for men.
tetra



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 05:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: tetra50
a reply to: knoledgeispower



You said, "do you always believe everything you read" and that is a juvenile statement not anything else you said, but you already know that. You can back peddle all you want in order to try and save face but it's too late, I see you for who you really are, someone who readily acts juvenile.


I wasn't aware enough I needed to save face to start attempting to do so. I obviously really offended you, so I'm truly sorry. You nailed me for being an immature idiot. Point taken, I guess.

I've read your other comments, and it's sad because I think we're probably on the same side, as women. But this illustrates how easily women become those who are frequently practiced on, too. We can't get along well enough together to coalesce our ability to fight it. You raised an important point in this thread, that's always been lacking: birth control for men.
tetra

When someone clearly insults me & then tries to deny that they did so, it irks me. You may have not been aware you were doing so because for some it's almost second nature but that doesn't make it excusable.

I'm done talking about it so if you want to move on to the subject at hand, great. If not, don't waste your time or mine.

To keep on topic: ((anyone can respond to this part))
Do you think they could also have a microchip that would keep a mans sperm at bay? If so, do you think guys would get it done?



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join