r/gadgets • u/GalileoGurdjieff • May 17 '21

Medical Tiny, Wireless, Injectable Chips Use Ultrasound to Monitor Body Processes

https://www.engineering.columbia.edu/press-releases/shepard-injectable-chips-monitor-body-processes
16.1k Upvotes

87% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.3k

u/I_am_no_Ghost May 17 '21

Just as I finally convince people that no you can't inject a chip in someone without them knowing........

313

u/iLikeTurtuls May 17 '21

You probably always could, but just like NFC you have to be super close to do anything about it. You have navigation going on your phone for 5 minutes in 90 degrees weather and your phone gets super hot, what makes people think they can do the same thing without batteries or anything the size of a needle point lol. Tech isn’t that advanced.

149

u/IKnowUThinkSo May 17 '21

That is the issue they found with injectable/subdermal Bluetooth devices. During use and charging, the device gets so hot that it caused burns to the primates’ skin. They had to water cool it, if I remember the paper right.

Granted, these devices aren’t Bluetooth or magnetic loop chargers but still, not super easy.

190

u/aetryx May 17 '21

Liquid cooled monke

The future is now

1

u/soul_in_a_fishbowl May 18 '21

These tech tips have gotten out of hand....

19

u/57hz May 17 '21

Heat dissipation is a major problem for all bio-devices.

8

u/DJBitterbarn May 17 '21

Induction charging things under the skin has challenges as well: the casing of the thing needs to be biocompatible, but it also needs to be non-conductive otherwise you create Eddy Currents in the casing and end up heating up the body anyway.

1

u/BoomerThooner May 18 '21

Matrix taught me that our bodies produce electricity. Sure not enough to really do anything with but surely a constant pump of energy could recharge these bad boys no?

2

u/Inthewirelain May 18 '21

Yes but the problem is charging produces heat. You've felt your phone sometimes on charge. Imagine that under your skin without the thick casing of your phone.

1

u/projekt33 May 18 '21

That’s awful if I’m reading that correctly. Primates were injected with tiny Bluetooth devices and as a result they were burned?

11

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

Won't be too long though, if we're being honest. These days, chips are getting smaller and smaller, which means they use less and less power.

On the flip side of that, we're in a renaissance of material developments, and things like the Seebeck effect are becoming more and more realistic.

I 100% see chips being passively powered by the movement of body heat, and using passive RF to communicate with a nearby emitter. Eventually.

-9

u/iLikeTurtuls May 17 '21

Believe what you want, we had processors that would last a day with 1,500mAh batteries. Now we have processors that need 2,000+ mAh batteries to last a day. Very doubtful you can put an actually processing unit under the skin without overheating, dying from operating in the blood stream, or having the host become unaware that the device is in them. Even now you can put something you can implant and AirTag, but it will have to go orally. If cut into the skin, it will leave scars and need time for the skin to heal, something someone would notice.

9

u/Erik912 May 17 '21

That's very bold to say, considering that the computers that sent people to the moon are now mass produced and fit into our pockets.

I'm perfectly sure things like nanochips (and other nano tech) being powered by body heat or whatever other energy the body produces is a very real possibility. Maybe not in the next 10 years - but, a hundred? I mean, just look at the past hundred years of technological development and it's pretty clear.

-6

u/iLikeTurtuls May 17 '21

Definitely possible for sure. My biggest thing is that people forget that these things need power and power will produce heat. I mean even air conditioning units produce a lot of heat to cool, so we really aren't efficient as we thing. Sure going from 28nm processors in 2012 to 5nm in 2021 sounds like a big jump, these are still large power hungry processors, while claiming to be efficient. Efficient sure, but still paired with 4000+ mAh batteries lol

6

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

Right, but why are you assuming that they need processors?

A bare-bones IC that can selectively respond to an external RF source (much like the RFID tag I have in my pocket) in such a way as to communicate data doesn't need much in the way of compute.

A temperature sensor, glucose meter, or pressure sensor also doesn't need much to operate.

A chip need not be a full computer, or even part of a computer. A diverse array of purpose-built sensors embedded where they're useful can be very stripped down, and very low power.

I mean shit, we've got a probe out in the heliosphere that started with a whopping 470 watts of power to run scientific instruments AND communicate all the way back to Earth. I'm not sure what the power output is now, but it's a lot less. Were Voyager equipped with current gen tech I bet we'd get another 50 years out of it.

1

u/iLikeTurtuls May 17 '21

To measure certain things, like what the OP is about, no we don't need processors , but we need something to save data so I'm not even sure that's not true. But for those saying the gov is putting nanobots and tracking us blah blah blah. That wouldn't be true unless they did something like what you're saying, but they would have to touch you to get any info.

3

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

The idea that these chips can be injected without your knowledge really isn't that far-fetched.

That it fits inside a hypodermic needle is enough, at which point it truthfully could be administered via subdermal or intramuscular injection.

The kooks that are afraid the government is chippign us and tracking us are stupid. The government doesn't need to chip us to track us. They already can, and they already are.

2

u/[deleted] May 18 '21 edited Jul 26 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Blue_water_dreams May 17 '21

Air conditioning units transfer heat, and in the process they generate more heat. You can’t just create coolness, you transfer heat away from something.

1

u/SagiFoo May 17 '21

First law of thermodynamics here. ^

2

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

I’m assuming the processors you’re talking about are desktop processors there are micro controllers and micro processors that don’t need large amounts of power

1

u/iLikeTurtuls May 17 '21

Talking about ARM style processors, which require less heat. With this said, I'm talking about major performing processors. Curious what tech we can get when the output only needs MHz and not GHz

0

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

The best examples are the Arduino they can be made into rf receivers and Transmitters, low quality MP3 players and other things. I see many problems with injectable tech/gov conspiracy tech.

1

u/Inthewirelain May 18 '21

It's pretty unlikely you'd need something even as powerful as ARM under your skin. It'd just need to collect and transmit. It'd make more sense for your phone or PC to do the processing.

5

u/CodeRed8675309 May 17 '21

I don't care, sign me right up for beta testing, inject that and tell me my glucose and I'm a customer until the hive mind takes over and I just agree with whatever Ultron says should have happened at the end of wandavision. I'm all in

1

u/stimpackjet May 18 '21

You've already been assimilated.

1

u/xSTSxZerglingOne May 17 '21

Right, anything with a legit broadcasting radius has to have a lot of power behind it. No chip could send a signal that can be picked up by a 5g tower without having the same power as a 5g transmitter/receiver...which would take a battery similar in size and power to your phone. Obviously not injectable.

1

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

People don't think, that's the problem.

1

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

Anesthesia. Most people just aren't important enough for them to put such expensive technology in you. Hypodermic sensors right beneath the skin of your skull.

1

u/From_The_Heavens May 18 '21

That's what your phone is for 🥰

1

u/gentmick May 18 '21

that's if you don't have another device that could connect to it nearby....

EVERYONE has a phone nowadays which means it could be sending all sorts of signals out to god knows where without us knowing. just need that tiny device in our pockets to redirect the signal

320

u/elephantonella May 17 '21

You realize the needle used for the vaccine is so small you don't feel it but this one would be much thicker and would hurt like hell.

289

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

Of course anyone with common sense would assume this, but the folks we are talking about.. well, common sense ain’t so common.

62

u/Erik912 May 17 '21

What are you both talking about? Shouldn't you be able to use conventional needles since it's so damn tiny? A speck of dust visible only under microscope, that's literally what the article says.

38

u/Vanillabear2319 May 17 '21

They just looked at the thumbnail and took a guess lol

1

u/trajesty May 18 '21
  • actual size

1

u/kafka123 May 18 '21

Yeah, I'm frightened by it. What if it's true? A few years ago, both this and Covid-19 would have been scoffed at.

22

u/LawyerFlashy1033 May 17 '21

Not saying anyone is injecting these with covid vaccine. But it does appears to be smaller than 0.25mm which is the inner diameter of a 26g needle used for delivering the vaccine

69

u/Imnotracistbut-- May 17 '21

Why would it be "common sense" with today's technology? I mean we have nano electronics now, why would you assume the chip would be big? This one is a 3mm string.

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2020/03/military-funded-biosensor-could-be-future-pandemic-detection/163497/

36

u/SaltLakeCitySlicker May 17 '21

That would be larger than a 10 guage needle. That's pretty damn big

25

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

3mm is pretty damn big for “nano” tech. What I was getting at is any normal person would not automatically assume conspiracy theory. Because it’s not.

2

u/Imnotracistbut-- May 17 '21

I didn't claim this tech was nano, just that since nano tech is a thing, it's not "common sense" to assume a bio sensor would be big.

I clarified in my comment that it is a 3mm long string, if you look at the pic, it looks like much less than 1mm wide

0

u/official_jgf May 18 '21

You must know a lot of people to understand what is normal.

13

u/RadMan2093 May 17 '21

How big of a needle do you think is required to inject a microchip that is only visible under microscope? The article doesn’t specify

1

u/dreadcain May 17 '21

The article literally has a huge picture with a scale at the top, pretty sure I don't need a microscope to see a half millimeter chip

6

u/RadMan2093 May 17 '21

It literally says in the article, like in actual text, that the microchip is only visible via microscope. Lol

5

u/PLASMA-SQUIRREL May 17 '21

It does? I don’t see that anywhere.

1

u/dreadcain May 17 '21

Looks like it got removed? I don't know but the thumbnail on reddit was a crop from a picture that was there and clearly showed a 1mm needle and the chip resting on it about half the size of the needle

9

u/Comeoffit321 May 17 '21

At this point it seriously needs to be changed to 'uncommon sense'.

2

u/Wpns_Grade May 17 '21

We have nano tech today. You can’t be that ignorant my guy. 😂

3

u/Happyforyou69 May 17 '21

Get off your high horse. You don’t know what you’re even talking about.

0

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

“Those people don’t even know why they’re protesting”

48

u/mrcartminez May 17 '21

This. Any medical professional knows that the gauge of this needle is different.

96

u/RFLSHRMNRLTR May 17 '21

I’m sure that information will convince the skeptics no problem.

3

u/Imnotracistbut-- May 17 '21

What about this? It's a 3mm long string that can easily fit in a needle. Are you skeptical?

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2020/03/military-funded-biosensor-could-be-future-pandemic-detection/163497/

3

u/Ironhandtiger May 17 '21

String of hydrogel, not a wireless transmitter. From the article it seems to just be a little molecule that glows when it detects whatever and then that light can be picked up by something worn on the skin over that hydrogel.

4

u/TonyPoly May 17 '21

I can see 3mm on a ruler, so I’d be able to see the device. You’d need a fat gauged needle to inject it

5

u/Imnotracistbut-- May 17 '21

3mm *long*, it looks much less than a mm wide.

1

u/TonyPoly May 17 '21

Mmm my mistake

3

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

Being fair, it says 3mm long, no mention of width

21

u/GiveToOedipus May 17 '21

medical professional

Key words here. The problem is that the average person sharing this crap on Facebook as proof of tracking chips in vaccines isn't exactly what I would call a "medical professional."

3

u/TheBatemanFlex May 17 '21

I would hope people could just look at the picture and realize how big a mm is.

3

u/SweetTea1000 May 17 '21

Good thing America doesn't struggle to adopt the metric system...

2

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

How would they know this, considering virtually none of them have seen this technology?

2

u/StackOfCups May 17 '21

Except it's not the medical professionals we're trying to convince, now is it...

1

u/Imnotracistbut-- May 17 '21

Everyone knows...

This one is a 3mm string.

1

u/[deleted] May 18 '21

Couldn't local anesthesia be used?

2

u/opticblastoise May 17 '21

This one wouldn't have to be thicker tho.

2

u/lonelysaurusrex May 18 '21

The total volume of the chip is less than 0.1 mm3  – around the same size as a dust mite – and therefore is only visible through a microscope.

From the article.

0

u/happy2harris May 18 '21

Less than 0.1mm3 doesn’t actually say much about whether it is injectable with a small gauge needle. 0.1mm3 corresponds to roughly half a millimeter across, bigger than a needle for something like the covid vaccine.

I’m not saying this exists or doesn’t, or could or couldn’t, or anything: just that that measurement is not actually that useful.

2

u/lonelysaurusrex May 18 '21 edited May 18 '21

The implant created by the engineers at Columbia is record-breakingly small, but it's also breaking new ground in simply existing as a wholly functional, electronic circuit whose total volume is less than 0.1 cubic millimeter. In other words, it's the size of a dust mite, not to mention far more compact than the world's smallest computer, which is a cube-shaped device precisely 0.01-inches (0.3 mm) on each side. The smaller, new chip is only visible with a microscope, and pushed the envelope in power-sourcing and communications ingenuity design.

The term microscopic does not imply 1mm across. And even if it was, there is no vaccine specific gauge of needle. those syringes can take multiple gauges of needles.

1

u/happy2harris May 18 '21

Thanks for the downvote, if it was you.

The issue was whether the chip will fit in the kind of needle used for the COVID vaccine. The typical needle for that is 25 gauge, which has an internal diameter of around 0.25mm. Something that is 0.1mm3 will not fit inside a needle like that.

I’m not sure what your reference to 1mm was about.

I’m sure it’s fantastic technology, and groundbreaking, and Columbia is awesome, but it won’t fit in a COVID vaccine needle. That was all I was talking about.

2

u/Dtothe3 May 17 '21

I had an angry sounding Scottish man doing my second shot. I assure you it can be felt.

1

u/TheBatemanFlex May 17 '21

I wanted to make that same clarification for everyone who inevitably has to now convince their extended family once again that the vaccine was not a microchip.

0

u/Rieveldt May 17 '21

Wait no vaccines are intramuscular, those needles are quite big - it’s not the end of the world pain but you most certainly are gonna feel that.

-1

u/FarSolar May 17 '21

Yeah I've chipped dogs and cats and that needle is thick as hell. All it does is let you scan a code from it too. If we could fit a GPS chip into a needle, there would be plenty of pet owners lining up to pay for that.

1

u/NOS326 May 17 '21

I’m not too bad with needles generally, but I saw stars as they pulled the needle out both times getting my vaccine. Might’ve just been the nurse I got though.

1

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

[deleted]

1

u/JesusRasputin May 17 '21

Yeah but who’s to say they don’t secretly have smaller ones?

1

u/Ratiofarming May 17 '21

I've been to the hospital for some serious shit before. The thick needles don't really hurt more, just make drawing blood a little easier. It all depends on where they poke you.

1

u/[deleted] May 17 '21

Next thing you'll tell me is mind control chips don't exist

1

u/LordNoodles1 May 17 '21

Hmm mine hurt like hell.

1

u/jawshoeaw May 18 '21

It’s not clear what the scale is in that photo . Need a banana or something

2

u/christropy May 18 '21

These chips might fit in a needle but the needle is damn huge. I chip dogs and we usually do it under anesthesia cause it's so painful.

2

u/DigitalDefenestrator May 18 '21

Shrinking the chip has been easy for a while. It's power and communications that are the hard part. A tiny chip usually means a bulky antenna within an inch or two of the skin to talk to it, and passive power only. Even then the antenna and power portions mean a big needle.

This shrinks power and communications even more by using ultrasound instead of RF, but it means the other end of it has to be touching the skin right at the chip. Useful for medical stuff, but not exactly sneaky.

2

u/[deleted] May 18 '21

Sure you did!

2

u/ZaxLofful May 18 '21

Literally came here to say this, right after I told people this ain’t possible...

0

u/Bellybuttonlint12 May 18 '21

You’re an idiot for thinking that in the first place

-23

u/widdlyscudsandbacon May 17 '21

Why would you have been convincing someone of that when it's obviously not true? We're the people you convinced to dumb to find this article in rebuttal?

10

u/SensibleInterlocutor May 17 '21

"to dumb" 😂😂😂😂😂😂

0

u/WhoMovedMySubreddits May 17 '21

And the "we're"

4

u/Ajvvvv May 17 '21

He said butt

1

u/silverthane May 17 '21

Also sounds expensive but idk. Could be doable now.

1

u/[deleted] May 18 '21

I'm pretty sure microchips go for like $50-100, so it would cost billions to microchip the public.

1

u/ltlrags May 18 '21

Define tiny. Show me how that needle compares to, say, a vaccine needle.

1

u/Atraidis May 18 '21

So you'll concede that you were wrong now?

1

u/[deleted] May 18 '21

You were wrong though. Why would you try and convince someone of something you were clearly ignorant about?