|
OwnHer312 -> RE: Microchipping (9/25/2012 9:35:20 AM)
|
This was actually discussed recently on "The View" (a popular woman-oriented morning show in the USA) in the context of microchipping children. The ladies on the show seemed to be okay with the idea, although they seemed to believe that the chips worked like GPS tracking devices, when in fact they are essentially just identification tags which can only be read with a reader similar to a retail checkout scanner. (When presented with a stray animal, a veterinarian or animal shelter scans the chip to obtain its number, then uses an on-line database to find the owner. The chip doesn't do any good unless the animal ends up somewhere with a scanner). GPS trackers small enough to fit on an a dog collar are commercially available, and of course most humans already carry a GPS tracking device (a cellular phone). Implantable GPS trackers are still the stuff of science fiction because of the lack of a suitable power source. The pet microchips are passive, being entirely powered by a brief burst of radio energy emitted by the scanner.
I am sure that neither the manufacturers of the chips nor the medical regulatory agencies in many countries certify the devices for human use, but they are certainly sterile and if implanted under sterile conditions should be no more hazardous than a body piercing. The installation would be trivial for a qualified piercer and I expect that there are piercers who would be willing to do it (in a consenting "animal", of course) even if it's a legal gray area.
The real reason for the device, of course, is to identify a creature that lacks the ability to tell a good samaritan its name or where it lives. Non-human pets obviously fall into this category, and it's harder for a thief to tamper with a microchip than it is to remove a collar tag. There is therefore little practical value to microchipping an adult human, although I can see there being a symbolic and kinky appeal to the device as a high-tech tag, especially for more gadget-centric owners and their property. It also has the advantage (or disadvantage, depending on your perspective) of being less obvious than an ownership tattoo or a collar. If the practice were to become widespread, a chip scanner might be a useful and entertaining addition to the local BDSM club, for identifying "pets" which may have found their way to the club without the permission of the owners. :-)
|
|
|
|
