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.

 

ObamaCare Subjects Nearly Every Phone and Computer to Government Control

page: 2
29
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


All medical software should be regulated...regardless of the media it is run on.


Stop trying to lie by saying it means all cell phones and computers will be under government control.


It honestly makes you look very very ignorant.



This is the worst in fear mongering and pandering to the idiots...some of which will surely believe this crap.


Breitbart may be dead, but his idiotic fear mongering lives.




posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by mamabeth
reply to post by beezzer
 


I have a treadmill* that also monitors by heart rate while I'm on it.
Would it also be considered a 'medical' device?

* my treadmill has not been used in a long time,it is currently in
my office collecting dust bunnies.It is also being used for storage.
edit on 12-3-2012 by mamabeth because: added


Not the treadmill itself, but I'm sure the company that makes the heart rate monitor is regulated.

Otherwise, they could just randomly display a heart rate and while you are jogging along on your treadmill with your heart rate at 300 but the unregulated monitor shows 120. And then when you have a heart attack and die...I bet you wish someone would have been making sure that heart rate monitor is accurate and up to regulations.

But this is the perfect example...treadmills are not regulated...but heart rate monitors are. Just because some treadmills have heart rate monitors on them doesn't mean all treadmills are regulated.

Just like since some cell phones/tablets/computers run medical software doesn't mean all cell phones/tablets/computers are regulated as medical devices.


Honestly...this article is pandering to idiots...I really hope no one falls in their demographic.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 
You want to make a case for reulation? Bully for you. Go for it.

But to put into a healthcare package, to hide it in a healthcare package, is disingenuous at best, and damned sneaky and crooked at worst.

Government regulation, government oversight over all means of wireless communications.

Lets hear your case for it!



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 
You want to make a case for reulation? Bully for you. Go for it.

But to put into a healthcare package, to hide it in a healthcare package, is disingenuous at best, and damned sneaky and crooked at worst.

Government regulation, government oversight over all means of wireless communications.

Lets hear your case for it!



I'm not making a case for that...because that isn't what is being proposed.

This is just what the fear mongers are trying to sell to people dense enough to buy it.


I'm making a case for regulation of medical software...I think any logical person would want someone to regulate medical software.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher


I'm not making a case for that...because that isn't what is being proposed.

This is just what the fear mongers are trying to sell to people dense enough to buy it.


I'm making a case for regulation of medical software...I think any logical person would want someone to regulate medical software.


Why not let the free market regulate it?
Why does every damned thing have to default to more government oversight?

Have a bad device, a bad product? Well guess what?! The market will let that product die because people won't buy it. (Because it is a bad product)
Or
Have government just impose fines, hire a bazzillion regulators/inspectors/rubber stampers and still have the damned product on the market because the sleezy CEO paid off a congressman who happens to be in his district!
edit on 12-3-2012 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Suprise me? No

I for one will not be using
any of these so called medical
apps and would advise anyone
against using them as well.

I personally do not want any doctor
or nurse using a phone app on me either.

Maybe over in Africa it would be good due to cost
but how are they going
to get cell coverage anyway?
edit on 12-3-2012 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


We're not supposed to talk about this stuff.
If this goes into full implementation, Sebelius will definitely be the second most powerful person in our nation. And she was not even elected... Scary thought... So much for the constitution...

We still have so much to learn about Obamacare. The only time Pelosi was right? Still don't know how it will be paid for!!

Good Find!!



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 



Why not let the free market regulate it?




And how do you propose we do that...just wait and watch where people are dying the most and then don't go to hospitals that are using that software???

The free market is concerned with profit...not safety...and healthcare isn't an industry we can just wait and let the "free market" decide which software/medical devices aren't killing people so we can make our decision.



Have a bad device, a bad product? Well guess what?! The market will let that product die because people won't buy it. (Because it is a bad product)


And how do we measure a "bad" medical device???

Exactly...we just keep a body count.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by beezzer
 



Why not let the free market regulate it?




And how do you propose we do that...just wait and watch where people are dying the most and then don't go to hospitals that are using that software???

The free market is concerned with profit...not safety...and healthcare isn't an industry we can just wait and let the "free market" decide which software/medical devices aren't killing people so we can make our decision.



Have a bad device, a bad product? Well guess what?! The market will let that product die because people won't buy it. (Because it is a bad product)


And how do we measure a "bad" medical device???

Exactly...we just keep a body count.


If this is new regulation that the Obma plan is trying to implement, then it would stand to reason that there isn't current government regulation.
Hence the title of the propoal

Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff - Mobile Medical Applications

www.fda.gov...

So where are the stacks of bodies? Where are the long lines of dead and dying bodies as evidence for this "proposal"?

There is none. Yet just for an imaginary "crisis" we now are looking at a new department, a new extension of the government. More oversight, more regulation, more rules, more paperwork (to justify governmnt involvement).
edit on 12-3-2012 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 
You want to make a case for reulation? Bully for you. Go for it.

But to put into a healthcare package, to hide it in a healthcare package, is disingenuous at best, and damned sneaky and crooked at worst.

Government regulation, government oversight over all means of wireless communications.

Lets hear your case for it!



I'm not making a case for that...because that isn't what is being proposed.

This is just what the fear mongers are trying to sell to people dense enough to buy it.


I'm making a case for regulation of medical software...I think any logical person would want someone to regulate medical software.


This is called gateway legislation that is full of back doors. It happens all the time. Smartphones are now medical devices because of the medical software that is loaded onto it....Tablets...


The press release issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which operates under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), on July 19, 2011, signaled the beginning of its regulatory process, this time concerning “mobile medical apps.” The announcement made it plain that such regulation certainly fell under its jurisdiction, as if declaring it made it so: “The use of mobile medical apps on smart phones and tablets is revolutionizing health care delivery,” according to Jeffrey Shuren, M.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. “Our draft approach calls for oversight of only those mobile medical apps that present the greatest risk to patients when they don’t work as intended.”



The July 19 announcement allayed concerns that the FDA was going to regulate every app somehow related to food, or drugs, or cosmetics. The press release said the agency would attempt to regulate only “a small subset of mobile medical apps that impact or may impact the performance or functionality of currently regulated medical devices.” These would include, initially at least:

Apps that are used as an accessory to a medical device already regulated by the FDA such as an app that allows a physician to make a diagnosis based on an image retrieved from a cloud by a smartphone or tablet

Apps that transform a smartphone or tablet into a regulated medical device by using attachments, sensors or other devices, such as an app that turns a smartphone, for example, into an ECG machine via sensors

thenewamerican.com...

More red tape.... SSDD

Mobile medical applications are becoming increasingly popular as many Americans want to engage actively and control their own health care. Estimates indicate that the number of smartphone consumers using medical apps will grow to 500 million by 2015. This demand for mobile medical applications underscores a market-driven explosion in the use of health-information technology in ways that engage consumers, health care providers and technology vendors to enhance health care outcomes and lower health costs.

All of this innovation and growth in mobile medical applications could come to a screeching halt if the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) moves forward with its proposed regulation of mobile medical applications. The FDA continues to explore options to regulate mobile medical applications as medical devices under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, particularly around adverse-event and patient-safety reporting. At this formative stage of emerging mobile medical applications, complicated and expensive new regulatory structures through the FDA would dampen prospects for future lifesaving innovations.

www.washingtontimes.com...



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Whose going to make the money?


Not if the FDA gets involved. The average time to approve a medical device is about three years and can cost upward of $75 million. In the software market, that is a lifetime. Additionally, if mobile apps are regulated as medical devices, they will be subject to the health care reform law’s 2.3 percent medical-device tax, raising prices as taxes are passed on to consumers. Free apps may no longer be free.

www.washingtontimes.com...

Just another revenue stream added to fund this bad boy..



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


More fear, dear?

I'm still not buying the boogeyman mindset regarding obamacare.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


Whose going to make the money?


Not if the FDA gets involved. The average time to approve a medical device is about three years and can cost upward of $75 million. In the software market, that is a lifetime. Additionally, if mobile apps are regulated as medical devices, they will be subject to the health care reform law’s 2.3 percent medical-device tax, raising prices as taxes are passed on to consumers. Free apps may no longer be free.

www.washingtontimes.com...

Just another revenue stream added to fund this bad boy..


Nice find!!!

This has got to be one of the "hidden" taxes inside the healthcare law.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by beezzer
 


More fear, dear?

I'm still not buying the boogeyman mindset regarding obamacare.


No fear. Just facts.

And you won't have to buy the mindset. It'll be provided for you, at the cost to taxpayers everywhere.

Hey, you want the Obama healthcare plan? Great! If he gets re-elected, you may just get i!



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by unityemissions
I'm not trying to defend this bill, but must say that some of the apps on the android market are messed up. I have a friend who is listening to this app that's telling her to eat 1400Kcal each day, while she is exercising for about an hour a day. She has lost a little weight, but looks horrible. I told her about yo-yo dieting, and the body entering starvation mode once you cut calories too quickly. She asserts this is quite a healthy way to lose weight. I can say nothing more, except that I hope her plan works successfully.


That seems like a very tame diet to me, go ask a personal trainer how much calories you should eat a day and how much exercise you should be doing if you want to lose weight, and they will tell you to eat even less and exercise more. 1400Kcal a day is way over the "starvation mode" area. When I dieted I lost 50 lbs in 3 months by eating just 1000Kcal a day and exercising about 5 hours a day, and I looked just fine the entire way through and didn't gain back any weight.
If your friend is really looking horrible it's not because of her diet, it's because she's sleep deprived or taking drugs.
edit on 3/12/2012 by bl4ke360 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 07:02 PM
link   
Hahahhaa thats funny

The case of regulation is your too stupid and you can't be trusted so never fear here comes Government!!!

So who regulates Government?



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 

So how would the gov. regulate this exactly? Only way to regulate is with oversight, oversight requires the ability of those overseeing to have access to your stuff, so they can look through it and decide if your allowed to have it or not.

In short, if they can regulate what apps are on your phone, they can regulate your phone. It doesnt take a huge leep of reasoning to figure that out.

No oversight= no regulations

regulations+oversight= we are gonna look through your #, cause we said we can to ensure that you dont dl somthing we didnt approve.

For all you that are gonna try to flame this, lol TRY! There is not one single instance in U.S. history where gov. oversight didnt = gov. agents going threw your sh!t. Be it your bank records, your business records, your tax returns... every single time the gov. fets involved they want to see your sh!t so they can go threw it, to make sure you are/ force your compliance.

So either oppose this kind of crap, or get your Iphone rdy for the gov. store to look threw it, to make sure your med for home app has all its updates or your gonna get fined for using non gov. regulated software on your home med device.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by reddwhite
 



So how would the gov. regulate this exactly? Only way to regulate is with oversight, oversight requires the ability of those overseeing to have access to your stuff, so they can look through it and decide if your allowed to have it or not.

In short, if they can regulate what apps are on your phone, they can regulate your phone. It doesnt take a huge leep of reasoning to figure that out.


You don't regulate the end users, you regulate the developers.

Why on earth would they do it the other way around???



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


It makes absolutely no sense for them to do it the other way. They have absolutely no way of stopping someone from downloading an app from over seas, I can dl anything from any comp anywhere on earth ( except china, DPRK...etc.) and send it to my phone.

The only way to regulate this, is from the customer end. There is absolutely no way for them to regulate this from the internet end. What is easier, stopping water from the small end or the big end of a funnel? Internet= big end, customer = little end.

They obviously intend to do this, or they wouldnt have gone through the trouble of putting it in the bill. The only way to regulate it is from the customer side. This is not that hard to figure out guys. Cmon, use your .s. I know this sounds stupid because of the obvious absurdity of the whole thing. Seriously though, think about it, there is only one way to regulate this. It isnt from the net side, if that were possible they would have stopped online piracy by now. The only way is from the customer side, by either forcing your phone comp. to censor data, or by forcing compliance from the public at large by the only regulatory tool they have in the box. Thats right, fines/and or jail time for non compliance. That is the only way to farce regulatory rules, fines/and or jail time.

So are we gonna get seat belt fines for not having the right version of the web at home doc on your phone? There has to be some teeth or we wont comply, so they have to have some system in place to force compliance. What are the punishments for non-compliance?



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I don't understand how someone can read this and get so upset by it.

Here's the actual draft:
FDA.gov

Right in the introduction it says (emphasis mine):

At this time, the FDA intends to apply its regulatory requirements solely to a subset of mobile apps that it is calling mobile medical applications or "mobile medical apps."


FDA's guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe the Agency's current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word "should" in Agency guidances means that something is suggested or recommended, but not required.


As described in this guidance, the FDA plans to apply its regulatory oversight only to certain types of mobile apps.


Doesn't say anywhere that it's going to be regulating all computers/smartphones etc.




top topics



 
29
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join