Anti-vaxxers blieve many unsupportable things. One of them makes tinfoil hats seem sane.
Anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists
It's all a bit Dunning-Kruger
Some common, preventable, vaccinatable diseases are on the rapid rise again, because anti-vaxxers are compromising herd immunity. Meanwhile they have a new conspiracy theory to justify their reticence to vaccinate: programmes are just a vehicle to inject us all with tracking devices. (Where's the eye-roll emoji.)
OK, let's get with some basic biology, and physics here.
First, the medical: The smallest implantable RFID tags at present are slightly larger than a grain of rice, so they ain't going down any intraveinous needle. They have to be implanted with a hugely over-sized needle subcutaneously. And even if they WERE injectable into a vein they'd instantly cause a thrombosis.
Second, the physics: The existing RFID tags can only be activated from very short range (i.e.) with the sensor touching, or practically touching, the skin. The power comes from the pulses emitted by the reader, and the interaction comes from interfering with those pulses sufficiently that the reader can sense them. It's a proximity thing. Anything smaller simply wouldn't have the capacity to interact with the reader. As an alternative, let's suppose the things are not passive and that somehow (say glucose reduction) they are able to power themselves in the body, and transmit actively. There's this thing in physics called the inverse square law which can easily be demonstrated that the detectable signal from a given emission drops off by the square of the distance from the source. That means that these tiny nano-trackers - with miniscule radio emissions - wouldn't even be detectable at the skin surface, let alone remotely as a trackable signal. And that same inverse square law means that the signal strength required to activate passive tags emitted remotely from fixed tracking points would have to be trillions of times stronger than at the skin surface - strong enough to cook everyone in the vicinity.
Third, the Hollywood: The idea of injectable trackable nuclear isotopes is a pure Hollywood fiction. It's a trope used in a number of stories, but it isn't practical. Anything emitting sufficient radiation to distinguish a human body from incidental background radiation, especially from some remote monitoring perspective (like aerial drone or satellite) would be lethal to the person in question and those around them. Furthermore, nuclear decay only produces three types of radiation, it does it purely randomly so there's no fixed pattern of emissions, and there is no way of tuning or codifying the emissions individually. You couldn't label an individual if you tried.
In short - it's complete bollocks, believed only by those who fail to understand even the most basic science but want to think they are cleverer than they are.
