Fowl Play in Bird Flu-Private Poultry Farmers and Wild Birds are NOT spreading "Bird Flu", PLANNED Genetic Enginering from UNITED NATIONS GLOBALSTS and others is the REAL CULPRIT--And you can bet "VACCINES" will be a mechanism to further the disease spread and death, pestilence, along with forced 'quarantines'-
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Fowl-Play-in-Bird-Flu.php
ISIS Press Release 05/05/06
Fowl Play in Bird Flu
There is no evidence that wild migrating birds mixing with backyard flocks spreads bird flu
Transnational factory farms and the globalised trade in poultry products are to blame
Dr. Mae-Wan Ho
Sources for this report are available in the ISIS members site. Full details here
Bird flu scare hurts the poultry industry
The European Union is set to approve special funding for poultry farmers suffering from falling prices and demand as the spread of the deadly H5N1 bird flu scares consumers away from chicken, turkey and other fowl [1]. Some 320 000 tonnes of unmarketable poultry meat are in cold storage across the 25 nation EU. Prices have fallen by 13 percent on average, but some countries are harder hit than others. Consumption of poultry products is down 5 percent in Denmark and Finland, but as much as 40 percent in Cyprus, 50 percent in Italy and 70 percent in Greece.
Germany has 70 000 tonnes of poultry products in storage, and estimates its sector has suffered damage of around 150 million euros from falling demand and the cost of culling birds. France with 40 000 tonnes in surplus stocks estimates it loses 31.9 million euros a month.
Wild birds to blame?
Bird flu is said to have spread from Asia to Europe in migrating wild birds. The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) stated in November 2005 [2]: “The movement of migratory birds has caused outbreaks to emerge in several countries and regions simultaneously.”
The first infection of commercial stocks was found on a French turkey farm in March 2006. The EU has ordered commercial stocks to stay inside or be inoculated, and some 45 countries have issued full or partial bans on poultry imports from France [1].
Meanwhile a fourth Afghan province, Kapisa, has been hit [3]. The virus had been found already in samples from birds in Kabul, Logar and Nangarhar provinces. There are strong suspicions that two other provinces, Laghman and Parwan, are also affected. Afghanistan is on the migration route for several species of wild birds. Poultry have been culled and quarantine measures introduced in affected areas.
Nineteen African nations held a five-day conference towards the end of April 2006 to discuss how they should prepare for a possible deadly outbreak of bird flu [4]. Nigeria, Niger, Cameroon, Egypt and Burkina Faso are the five African countries with confirmed H5N1 bird flu.
H5N1 has forced the slaughter of 200 million birds so far, as the disease spread from Asia to Europe, Africa and the Middle East. Late last year, thousands of migratory birds mysteriously dropped dead in central Malawi, though tests proved negative for H5N1. But the alarm has already hurt the poultry industry in Malawi, with most importers cancelling orders.
While scientists also say that wild birds are spreading the deadly bird flu, there are strong dissenting voices. The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), for example, told the BBC that the trade in birds and the movement of poultry products is a more likely cause [5]. Significantly, there are no migration routes that would take birds from China to Turkey at this time of the year.
There is also little direct evidence that migratory birds carry and transmit H5N1. FAO in collaboration with World Health Organisation (WHO) had admitted in May 2005 [6], “To date, extensive testing of clinically normal migratory birds in the infected countries has not produced any positive results for H5N1 so far.”
After testing hundreds of thousands of wild birds for the disease, scientists have only rarely identified live birds carrying the highly pathogenic H5N1. In a test of 13 000 wild birds in marshes within the bird flu infested provinces of China, the H5N1 virus was found in only 6 ducks [7]. But the scientists could not bring themselves to conclude that wild migrating birds are probably not to blame: “Our data show that H5N1 influenza virus, has continued to spread from its established source in southern China to other regions through transport of poultry and bird migration.”
The reality is that nearly all the wild birds that have tested positive for the disease were dead, and in most cases, found near to outbreaks in domestic poultry [8].
The WHO recently said that viruses from Turkey's first two human cases were virtually identical to those that killed 6 000 migratory birds in a nature reserve, Qinghai, in central China last year. But RSPB's conservation director Dr. Mark Avery insists that the trade in wild birds and the movement of poultry and poultry products, such as chicken manure used to fertilize fish farms, has led directly to the transfer of H5N1 across national boundaries [5].
“No species migrates from Qinghai, China, west to Eastern Europe,” BirdLife's Dr. Richard Thomas said. “When plotted, the pattern of outbreaks follows major road and rail routes, not flyways [8].
Wild birds are the reservoir for influenza viruses
Wild fowl and shore birds are believed to form the reservoir of influenza viruses of type A, (see Box) which cause diseases in many other species, including humans, pigs, horses, mink, cats, marine animals and a range of domestic birds [9].
Influenza virusesThere are 3 types of influenza viruses, A, B and C. The influenza A virus genome consists of 8 segments of RNA coding for 11 proteins, and they are further classified by subtype on the basis of the two main surface glycoproteins (proteins with complex carbohydrate side chains): haemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA). Only influenza A viruses infect birds. Humans can be inflected with influenza types, A, B and C viruses. Subtypes of influenza A currently circulating among people worldwide include H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2 [10]. Avian influenza A viruses of the subtypes H5 and H7, including H5N1, H7N7 and H7N3 viruses have been associated with high pathogenicity, and human infection with these viruses has r anged from mild (H7N3, H7N7) to severe and fatal disease (H7N7, H5N1). Wild birds are the natural host for all known subtypes of influenza A viruses. In wild birds and poultry throughout the world, influenza A viruses representing 16 HA and 9 NA subtypes have been detected in numerous combinations, such as H1N1, H3N3, H16N3 and so on [9]. Typically wild birds do not become sick when infected. Domestic poultry such as turkeys and chickens can become very sick and die from avian influenza, and some avian influenza A viruses also can cause serious disease and death in wild birds. Avian influenza viruses are designated as low pathenogenic (LPAI) when they do no cause disease or only mild disease, and highly pathogenic (HPAI) when they do. The switch from low to high pathogenicity is not fully understood. The HA protein is synthesized as a single polypeptide precursor, which is cleaved into HA 1 and HA 2 subunits by proteases. The switch from low to highly pathogenic avian virus appears to be associated with basic amino acid residues introduced into the HA cleavage site, which makes the protein easier to cleave and facilitates virus replication. In general, human infection with avian influenza viruses occurs very infrequently, and has been associated with direct contact with infected sick or dead domestic poultry. At least part of the barrier preventing person-to-person transmission is that the HA protein on the virus' coat must bind to cell surface receptors in order to gain entry into cells. This binding is specific for certain carbohydrate side chains attached to the cell surface receptor proteins. The HA of the avian virus recognizes carbohydrate side chains that end in sialic acid linked to galactose in an a -2,3 chemical bond, i.e., SA- a -2,3-gal, whereas the human influenza virus HA recognizes an a -2,6 chemical bond: SA- a -2,6-gal. The HA protein of H5N1 is typical of avian viruses, which is why the virus cannot replicate sufficiently in a human host for person-to-person transmission to take place. However, many scientists believe that once the H5N1 has mutated its HA to recognize SA- a -2,6-gal, then human transmission would occur, and a global pandemic would result Influenza viruses evolve by small point mutations (antigenic drift) or large changes due to reassortment (antigenic shift), the mixing of genome segments from different viruses. |
|---|
Certain birds, particularly water birds, are thought to act as hosts by carrying the virus in their intestines and shedding it in saliva, nasal secretions and faeces. However, the viruses circulating in wild birds are generally not the highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) strains that cause deadly bird flu. They do not cause illness in the birds, and are referred to as low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) viruses. LPAI have been isolated from at least 105 wild bird species of 26 different families. All subtypes have been detected in the bird reservoir and in poultry, whereas relatively few have been detected in other species. Ducks, geese, swans, gulls, terns and waders are the major LPAI virus reservoir, where the virus preferentially infects cells lining the intestinal tract and is excreted in high concentrations in their faeces. Influenza viruses remain infectious in lake water for up to 4 days at 22C, and for more than 30 days at 0C. Faecal to oral transmission is the most frequent route for transmitting viruses, both of high and low pathogenicity.
The species in which influenza viruses are endemic, such as ducks, gulls and waders share the same habitat at least part of the year with other species in which influenza viruses are frequently detected, including geese, swans, rails, petrels and cormorants.
Wild migrating birds mostly follow routes (flyways) that go North-South, but some birds have breeding ranges that cross the Atlantic, and the birds over-winter in the same geographic area in the south. Migrating birds make frequent stops en route where different species congregate, increasing the chances of exchanging viruses among themselves and distributing LPAI viruses between countries and continents.
Since 1997, more than 16 outbreaks of H5 and H7 influenza have occurred among poultry in the United States. Highly pathogenic strains can cause 90 to 100 percent deaths in poultry. So how do low pathogenic viruses become highly pathogenic?
How highly pathogenic bird flu viruses are created
The influenza A virus genome is in eight separate segments. The segmented genome allows the viruses from different species to mix and exchange segments to create new influenza viruses. A pig infected with a human virus and a bird virus at the same time would allow the two viruses to exchange segments to create a new virus that retained most of the genes of the human virus but had the avian haemagglutinin and/or neuraminidase gene(s). The resulting new virus might be able to infect humans and spread from person to person (see Box). If this new virus causes serious illness in humans, then a pandemic would result. This g ene exchange could even take place in a human infected at the same time with human and avian flu viruses.
In 1997, an HPAI outbreak caused by H5N1 occurred in chicken farms and live bird markets in Hong Kong. This resulted in the first reported case of human influenza and death attributable directly to avian influenza virus. The H5N1 HPAI virus reappeared in 2002 in waterfowl at two parks in Hong Kong and was also detected in other captive and wild birds. It resurfaced again in 2003 and devastated the poultry industry in large parts of Southeast Asia since 2004. In 2005, the virus was isolated during an outbreak among migratory birds in Qinghai Lake, China, affecting large numbers of wild birds. This wiped out an estimated 10 percent of the global population of Bar-headed Geese. Subsequently, the virus reappeared across Asia, Europe and the Middle East, and in several African countries. Wild bird deaths have been reported in several of these countries in Europe, particularly affecting Mute Swans and Whooping Swans, but also other waterfowl species, and occasionally in raptors, gulls and herons. So far it has caused mortality in more than 60 wild bird species [9].
But do wild migratory bird carry and spread HPAI as has been claimed, or are they just the victims of the deadly bird flu viruses that emerge in domestic fowl?
Genetic analysis provide no evidence that wild birds are to blame
Genetic analysis of avian influenza viruses in the public databases, based on the matrix protein gene M, reveals that the viruses can be divided into two distinct lineages [9], Eurasian and American, reflecting the long-term ecological and geographical separations of the hosts. Both lineages are also quite separate from human influenza viruses. The H5N1 highly pathogenic influenza viruses form a lineage derived from the Eurasian lineage.
The genetic separation between Eurasian and North American avian flu viruses is a bit surprising, as the bird fauna of North America and Eurasia are not absolutely isolated from each other. Some ducks and shore birds cross the Bering Strait during migration or have breeding ranges that include both the Russian Far East and Northwestern North America.
There are also other aspects of the virus that would appear to encourage genetic exchange between the two groups of avian flu viruses when the host birds meet up, such as the reassortment of viral genome segments (see above). Apart from that, the usual process of recombination (exchange of parts of genome segments) could also occur.
Not only do the avian flu viruses of Eurasia and North America form distinct lineages, the gulls in Eurasia and North America also each have their own distinct lineage of viruses. The evidence suggests that there are strong interspecific barriers to gene exchange, and it is not easy for viruses to jump species, and that complex adaptations are needed to achieve sustained transmission of the virus in a new species [11] (see “What can you believe about the bird flu pandemic?” this series).
The fact remains that HPAI viruses such as H5N1 are not endemic in wild birds as they are in domestic poultry, and when wild birds do contract the HPAI viruses, they succumb in large numbers, and are in no state to further transmit the disease along their usual migration routes .
As the researchers conclude [9]: “For the H5N1 virus, it is without doubt that domestic waterfowl, specific farming practices, and agroecological environments played a key role in the occurrence, maintenance, and spread of HPAI for many affected countries… Although numerous wild birds have also become infected, it has been much debated whether they play an active role in the geographic spread of the disease…”
Fowl play in deadly bird flu
Wild birds are not the only victims of bird flu; the other victims are small farmers and ordinary people who keep domestic fowl in their backyard to supplement their income or diet.
In response to the spread of bird flu, governments around the world are destroying backyard flocks and making indoor confinement of poultry mandatory [8, 12]. So far, 16 countries in Europe, Asia and Africa have imposed bans or restrictions on outdoors poultry farming. Forced confinement of poultry threatens the livelihood and food security of small- scale farmers and poor families in countries affected by bird flu. In Southeast Asia, governments, supported by the FAO, are encouraging framers to set up mesh screens or bamboo enclosures for their poultry. The costs, estimated at US$50-70, are simply beyond the means of Asia's small farmers, and are forcing them to abandon poultry altogether [8]. Forced confinement also threatens certified organic poultry operations, grass-fed pastured poultry and free-range egg production [12].
Quebec in Canada has imposed strict rules that require all farmers to keep poultry indoors and to keep wild birds out; despite the fact that the Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre survey of wild birds has found no incidence of HPAI in Canada [13].
Factory farms and globalised poultry trade are to blame
There is growing evidence that HPAI originates in factory farms and is spread not by migrating wild birds so much as by the globalised poultry trade. In low-density backyard flocks, a high pathogenic bird flu virus will simply kill all the birds quickly without infecting other birds. In a factory farm with a high density of birds, however, the virus can spread and multiply rapidly throughout the huge confined flock, and beyond that, via the global trade in live birds, eggs, virus-contaminated feed and manure, across country borders and across continents.
There is indeed strong correlation between exposure to factory farms and incidence of HPAI. Thailand, China and Vietnam, all have a highly developed poultry industry that has expanded dramatically. Production of chicken meat in Southeast Asia - Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam – jumped from around 300 000 tonnes in 1971 to 2 440 000 tonnes in 2001 [8]. China's production of chicken tripled during the 1990s to over 9 million tonnes a year. Practically all the new poultry production has happened on factory farms outside major cities and is integrated into the transnational production system. Live birds and eggs are exported to countries such as Nigeria (where the first HAI outbreak in Africa occurred), as well as ‘feed' which often includes litter (i.e., manure) in the ingredients. Nigeria has a large and poorly regulated factory poultry sector that is supplied with chicks from factory farms in China [14]
Manure that may contain live virus is spread on surrounding farmland, or exported as fertilizer and through run-off, may end up in surface waters where wild birds feed and rest. Chicken manure is even found in fish farm feed formulations where it is introduced directly into the aquatic environment.
Wild birds and poultry that have fallen victim to HPAI in Asia, Turkey and Nigeria appear to have been directly exposed to HPAI virus originating in the factory farm system.
In Asia, a flock of wild ducks died from HPAI after having come into contact with the disease at a remote lake where a fish farm used feed pellets made from poultry litter from a factory farm [8]. In Turkey, a massive cull of backyard flocks – and the deaths of three children – took place after a nearby factory farm sold sick and dying birds to local peasants at cut-rate prices.
Recent genetic evidence suggests that domestic ducks may act as a reservoir of H5N1 influenza viruses after the virus has emerged [15]. H5N1 viruses were isolated from apparently healthy domestic ducks in Mainland China from 1999 to 2002, and researchers found that the isolates were becoming progressively more pathogenic for mammals . Twenty-one viruses isolated were confirmed to be H5N1 subtype and antigenically similar to the virus that was the source of the 1997 Hong Kong bird flu haemagglutinin gene. All are highly pathogenic in chickens, most causing 100 percent mortality, although the earliest isolates were less lethal. When tested on mice, however, there was a marked increase in pathogenicity with time. The earliest seven isolates were non-pathogenic or of low pathogenicity, the next seven were more pathogenic and the last four, highly pathogenic. The results suggest that while circulating in domestic ducks, H5N1 viruses gradually acquired the characteristics that make them lethal in mice. One possible explanation is the transmission of duck H5N1 viruses to humans, the selective evolution of the viruses in humans, and their subsequent transmission back to ducks.
The presence of H5N1 viruses lethal to chickens from apparently healthy farmed ducks is another important route for the virus to spread through trade.
Blaming and devastating the victims
Numerous papers, statements and documents issued by the United Nations FAO, WHO, and government agencies have been silent on the role of industrial poultry farming in the bird flu crisis, and indeed, have proposed to compensate them generously for loss profits (see above). Instead, the finger is pointed at backyard farms, calling for tighter controls of their operations and greater “restructuring” of the poultry sector.
The big poultry corporations are even trying to use the bird flu outbreaks to shut down small-scale poultry farming altogether. “We cannot control migratory birds but we can surely work hard to close down as many backyard farms as possible,” declared Margaret Say, Southeast Asian director for the USA Poultry and Egg Export Council.
A team of scientists who analysed the H5N1 epidemic in Thailand 2004 found that the risks for HPAI infection were 5.3, 5.1 1.5, 32.4 and 2.3 times higher, respectively in commercial layers, broilers, ducks, quails and geese than in back yard chickens [16]. This is clear evidence corroborating other findings that corporate factory farms are to blame, and not backyard farms. On that basis, we should be calling for closure of factory farms, not family farms.
Genetic engineering scientists too, are taking this opportunity to promote their wares: transgenic ‘flu-resistant' chickens [8]. “Once we have regulatory approval, we believe it will take between four and five years to breed enough [transgenic] chickens to replace the entire world population,” said Laurence Tiley, Professor of Molecular Virology at Cambridge University in the UK. Genetic engineering is the best way to breach species barriers and to allow viruses to jump species to create pandemics (see “What can you believe about bird flu?” this series).
---
Related: http://au.groups.yahoo.com/group/FoodHerbHealth/message/2876
or http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pretribbersonly/message/6089
Bt Foods Kill Sheep!
=====================
Note: this "Omega" site is operated by some enviro-wacko who is very wrong in many areas. However, they do expose truths in some areas, like about RIFD and the effects of genetically altered seeds and foods. --"Cheyenne Cin"
http://omega.twoday.net/topics/RFID/
RFID
San Francisco IndyMedia
02/15/06
Radio frequency identification (RFID) tags -- tiny wireless circuits that derive their power from radio waves and cost just pennies to make -- have quickly found their way into identification badges, shipping containers, even ordinary store products. Because, unlike barcodes, the tags can be read surreptitiously, a number of groups have raised privacy concerns. To address these concerns, leading RFID makers have created so-called 'Gen 2' chips that will divulge their data only after a reader transmits the correct password. The new chips can also be triggered by a different password to silently self-destruct, for example as a customer leaves a store. Encryption protects the password transmission. But renowned cryptographer Adi Shamir of Weizmann University claims to have found a way to bypass the encryption scheme and obtain the self-destruct password using technology no more sophisticated than that in a common cell phone...
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2006/02/1724713.php
Informant: Thomas L. Knapp
January 27, 2006
VERICHIP RFID IMPLANT HACKED!
Will Security Problems Quash IPO Plans for Controversial Company?
The VeriChip can be hacked! This revelation along with other worrisome details could put a crimp in VeriChip Corporation's planned initial public offering (IPO) of its common stock, say Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre.
The anti-RFID activists and authors of "Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track Your Every Move with RFID" make no bones about their objection to VeriChip's plans to inject glass encapsulated RFID tags into people. But now they've discovered information that could call VeriChip's entire business model into question.
"If you look at the VeriChip purely from the business angle, it's a ridiculously flawed product," says McIntyre. She notes that security researcher Jonathan Westhues has shown how easy it is to clone a VeriChip implanted in a person's arm and program a new chip with the same number.
Westhues, known for his prior work cloning RFID-based proximity cards, has posted his VeriChip cloning demo online at
http://cq.cx/verichip.pl.
The VeriChip "is not good for anything," says Westhues, has absolutely no security and "solves a number of different non-problems badly."
The chip's security issues may spell trouble for those who have had one of the microchips embedded in their flesh. These include eighteen employees in the Mexican Attorney General's office who use an implanted chip to enter a sensitive records room, and a handful bar patrons in Europe who use the injected chips to pay for drinks. "What are these people going to do now that their chips can be cloned?" says McIntyre. "Wear tinfoil shirts or keep everyone at arm's length?"
Albrecht quips, "A man with a chip in his arm may soon find himself wondering whether that cute gal on the next bar stool likes his smile or wants to clone his VeriChip. It gives new meaning to the burning question, 'Does she want my number?'"
But the VeriChip's problems don't stop there, says McInytre, who is also a former bank examiner and financial writer. She has carefully analyzed the company's SEC registration statement and associated chipping information and discovered serious flaws. It turns out the company's own literature indicates that chipped patients cannot undergo an MRI if they're unconscious. What's more, the company admits that critical medical information linked to the chip could be unavailable in a real emergency. "These issues call VeriChip's promotional campaigns and business plan into question," McIntyre says.
The instructions provided to medical personnel warn that chipped patients should not undergo an MRI unless they are fully alert and able to communicate any "unusual sensations or problems," like movement or heating of the implant. This conflicts with company's efforts to promote people who cannot speak for themselves, such as Alzheimer's patients, those with dementia, the mentally disabled, and people concerned about entering an emergency room unconscious.
"The irony is that implantees will have to wear a Medic Alert bracelet or bear some obvious marking so they aren't mistakenly put in an MRI machine," Albrecht says.
Chipped patients might also have to wear a Medic Alert bracelet as a back-up in case the VeriChip database containing their critical medical information is unavailable. The fine print on the back of the VeriChip Patient Registration Form warns implantees that "the Company does not warrant...that the website will be available at any particular time," and physicians are told the product might not function in places where there are ambient radio transmissions--like ambulances. In addition, patients are required to waive any claims related to the product's "merchantability and fitness." The waiver paragraph as it appears on the form is reprinted below:
"Patient...is fully aware of any risks, complications, risks of loss, damage of any nature, and injury that may be associated with this registration. Patient waives all claims and releases any liability arising from this registration and acknowledges that no warranties of any kind have been made or will be made with respect to this registration. ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, HOWEVER ARISING, WHETHER BY OPERATION OF LAW OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MECHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE EXCLUDED AND WAIVED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COMPANY BE LIABLE TO PATIENT FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOST INCOME OR SAVINGS) ARISING FROM ANY CAUSE WHATSOEVER, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THEIR POSSIBILITY, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH DAMAGES ARE SOUGHT BASED ON BREACH OF CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, OR ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY." [Emphasis in the original.]
"For a life or death medical device, that's unbelievable," says McIntyre. "I wouldn't buy toilet paper that required that kind of a disclaimer, never mind a product that's supposed to serve as a lifeline in an emergency."
McIntyre contacted the VeriChip Corporation for comments on these issues and was initially promised a response. When the company failed to get to get back to her, McIntyre followed up and was told that the employee had been instructed not to answer her questions. The unanswered questions, along with photos of the VeriChip and associated literature, are available at
http://www.spychips.com/verichip/unanswered-questions.html.
ABOUT THE BOOK
"Spychips: How Major Corporations and Government Plan to Track your Every Move with RFID" was released in October 2005. Already in its fifth printing, "Spychips" is the winner of the Lysander Spooner Award for Advancing the Literature of Liberty and has received wide critical acclaim. Authored by Harvard doctoral researcher Katherine Albrecht and former bank examiner Liz McIntyre, the book is meticulously researched, drawing on patent documents, corporate source materials, conference proceedings, and firsthand interviews to paint a compelling -- and frightening -- picture of the threat posed by RFID.
Despite its hundreds of footnotes and academic-level accuracy, the book remains lively and readable according to critics, who have called it a "techno-thriller" and "a masterpiece of technocriticism."
CASPIAN: Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering Opposing retail surveillance schemes since 1999.
http://www.spychips.com/
http://www.nocards.org/
You're welcome to duplicate and distribute this message to others who may find it of interest.
Informant: ireland
Modetrends aus den USA
Aus der Rubrik: Privacy Watch
Montag, 16. Januar 2006
von Christian Rentrop
Was tut die Jugend nicht alles, um zu missfallen. Immer größere Tatoos, Piercing, Branding, Zungenspalting und Metallhaken-unter-die-Kopfhaut-Schraubing schocken nicht nur Eltern, sondern auch den Rest der Menschheit. Stoff für Talkshows, das Problem: Man gewöhnt sich schnell an den Anblick. Deshalb hat sich die amerikanischen Jugend etwas Neues ausgedacht: Tagging.
Immer rein damit!
Tagging? Das gibt's doch schon. Beliebter Gag in Bussen, an Bahnhöfen, Hauswänden: Es wird eine Unterschrift hinterlassen, wahlweise mit Superfett-Edding oder eben mit Sprühdose. Das allerdings ist nicht gemeint. Vielmehr lässt sich die Jugend der Vereinigten Staaten nach einer Meldung der Nachrichten-Agentur Reuters immer öfter RFID-Funkchips spritzen. Die kurz "Tags" genannten Silizium-Implantate haben der Bewegung ihren Namen gegeben, die RFID-Verrückten bezeichnen ihre Vorgehensweise auch als "Chipping". Und das geht so: Man nehme einen RFID-Chip, spritze ihn unter die Haut und schon zählt man zur neuen, hippen Gruppe der "Getagten". Klingt albern? Ist es auch.
Das Tagging von Lebewesen ist nämlich keinesfalls eine neue Idee. Die Implantation von RFID-Chips beim Menschen war bereits 2004 ein Thema, Haustiere und Nutzvieh sind schon seit langer Zeit "Nutznießer" der Technologie. Das etwa reiskorngroße Implantat besteht aus einem winzigen RFID-Chip, der in ein Glaskügelchen eingelassen ist. Das soll nicht nur verhindern, dass der Chip kurzschließt, auch unangenehme Reaktionen des Körpers auf Silizium können auf diese Weise ausgeschlossen werden.
"Mach mir den Sendemast!"
Doch was für Daten sind auf den RFID-Chips gespeichert? Mit Hilfe der kleinen Funker lassen sich zum Beispiel Türen wie durch Zauberhand öffnen, Autos ohne Schlüssel starten oder Computer sichern. Kein technisches Gerät, bei dem es nicht denkbar ist, dass RFID-Chips den Job erledigen, der bisher durch Passwörter, Schlüssel oder Handarbeit durchgeführt werden musste. Sogar die Speicherung von Ausweisdaten sind denkbar, genormt ist in diesem Zusammenhang allerdings noch nichts, außer der RFID-Technologie an sich.
Das "Chipping" jedenfalls scheint zum Trend zu werden. Und es ist sicherlich eine schöne Vorstellung, dass zum Beispiel der iPod oder das Handy nur in der Hand ihres Besitzers funktionieren, weil dieser den passenden RFID-Chip implantiert hat. Und natürlich sind viele andere Anwendungen machbar. Die Chip-Technologie ist genormt und kann jederzeit mit entsprechenden Lesegeräten ausgelesen werden. Eine datenschutzrechtliche Bedrohung besteht jedoch nicht: Die Reichweite der winzigen Chips ist zu gering, als dass das Risiko bestünde, im Rahmen einer RFID-Messung auf der Straße ausgelesen zu werden. Denn die Chips werden durch einen Sender nur aktiviert und funken zurück. Starke Signale sind aufgrund der geringen Größe der Chips kaum möglich.
Verchipte Hipster und andere Körperschmuck-Fanatiker
Sind die verchipten Hipster nun die ersten Cyborgs? Offensichtlich gibt es Menschen, die nichts dagegen haben, sich mit elektronischen Komponenten "verbessern" zu lassen. Es steht außer Frage, dass die Tagger auch zu anderen technischen Upgrades greifen werden, sobald sie verfügbar sind. Woran ja im Grunde auch nichts Falsches ist. Spätestens beim in der Science-Fiction-Literatur beschriebenen Austausch von Körperteilen sollten aber zumindest normal veranlagte Menschen einen Stopp einlegen. Doch gerade die Körperkünstler, die sich gerne einmal durchstechen oder bemalen lassen, dürften daran ihre Freude haben.
Gut, dass es sich bei den Taggern zur Zeit eher um technisch Interessierte und nicht um verrückte Schönheits-Fanatiker handelt. Zumal deren Liebe zu körperlichen Schmerzen durch die Harmlosigkeit des Chip-Implantierens wohl kaum angesprochen werden dürfte: Das beschränkt sich nämlich auf einen Nadelstich wie bei einer Impfung. Nichts für die Nadel-Fanatiker aus dem Körperschmuck-Lager. Die ersten Freaks zeigen bereits ihre "Operationen" im Internet.
Dienste für den Chip-Träger von Welt
Anbieter der Chipimplantate sind Unternehmen wie VeriSign, die nicht nur das subkutane RFID-Implantat entwickelt haben, sondern auch dessen Verbreitung vorantreiben. Auf den Chips selbst ist übrigens kaum mehr als eine Seriennummer gespeichert, die den Träger mit Hilfe einer Datenbank eindeutig identifiziert. Entsprechende Dienste, zum Beispiel die Speicherung von Ausweis- oder Schlüsseldaten, übernimmt VeriSign. Sinn macht diese Form der Anwendung vor allem bei Patienten in Krankenhäusern oder Sträflingen.
Wird der Chip nicht mehr gebraucht, lässt er sich durch einen kleinen Schnitt mit dem Skalpell jederzeit entfernen. Die Gefahr, dass das Implantat zu sehr mit dem Fleisch verwächst, sodass eine größere Operation vonnöten wäre, ist dank der Glas-Hülle überaus gering. Allerdings besteht auch ein wesentlich größeres Problem als das des eingewachsenen Implantats: Skrupellose Verbrecher könnten Einbrüche und Autodiebstähle demnächst mit den Chips der Besitzer durchführen, natürlich ohne dass der Besitzer noch mit dem Chip zusammenhängt. Es gilt also die Parole "Augen auf beim Autokauf", Fahrzeuge, die einen mumifizierten Arm als Schlüsselanhänger haben, sollten gemieden werden.
http://www.netzwelt.de/news/73410-rfid-funkchips-als-modegag.html
Nachricht von der BI Bad Dürkheim
Offline 
Send Email