Okay, Hear Me Out: Could a Pacemaker Double as a Locator Beacon?
- Rich Washburn
- 2 days ago
- 3 min read
I was reading a recent NewsNation article about investigators using what they described as a “signal sniffer” mounted to a helicopter in the search for Nancy Guthrie. The idea, according to the report, was to try to detect emissions from her pacemaker. And my brain did what it always does. It started wandering. Not in a conspiracy way. Not in a “I’ve cracked the case” way. Just in a technical, curious, “has anyone had this conversation?” kind of way. Because here’s the thing. Pacemakers already transmit.
We Know They Talk — Just Quietly
Modern pacemakers operate in the 402–405 MHz MICS band. They emit extremely low-power telemetry signals so doctors can interrogate the device, check battery levels, review arrhythmia data, and so on.
They’re not blasting RF like a Wi-Fi router. They’re whispering in microwatts. But they are radios. And once you say that out loud — once you acknowledge that a pacemaker is, in fact, a powered RF-capable device embedded inside a human body — a different kind of question emerges:
Could that telemetry, under the right conditions, be detected at range?
Not hacked. Not exploited. Just detected.
This Isn’t My First Hardware-Does-Something-Weird Thought
A couple years ago, I wrote about the “RAMBO” attack — where researchers demonstrated that RAM could be manipulated to emit electromagnetic radiation in a way that allowed data exfiltration from air-gapped systems.
RAM isn’t a radio. Until it is.
GPUs have been used to leak acoustic signals. SATA cables have behaved like antennas. Hardware doesn’t need permission to obey physics.
Electricity switching equals electromagnetic radiation. Always.
So when I read about a “signal sniffer” trying to detect a pacemaker, I didn’t think it sounded insane. I thought: That’s actually a really interesting RF problem.
Would It Work?
That’s where I genuinely don’t know.
Pacemaker telemetry is:
Extremely low power
Intermittent
Designed for close-range clinical use
We’re talking feet, not miles.
Could a helicopter-mounted system with high-gain antennas, low-noise amplifiers, and serious filtering detect it? Maybe — if proximity is tight and the frequency is known. Is it practical over wide terrain? Probably not.
But here’s the part I keep circling back to: If you’re investigators thinking like hackers — meaning you’re willing to test unconventional vectors — why not try? Worst case? It doesn’t work. Best case? You get a hit. That feels like a reasonable experiment.
The Broader Question No One Seems to Be Asking
Now let’s zoom out.
Pacemakers are most commonly implanted in older populations.Older populations are statistically more vulnerable to wandering incidents — dementia, Alzheimer’s, confusion, disorientation.
We already use:
GPS bracelets
Wearable trackers
AirTags sewn into clothing
But those can be removed.
Pacemakers cannot.
So here’s the calm, non-sci-fi question:
Should future pacemakers have an optional emergency beacon mode?
Not default. Not always on. Not trackable by random third parties.
But something like:
Clinically activated
SAR-enabled
Authenticated access only
Extremely low duty-cycle beaconing
We’re already embedding:
Microcontrollers
Radios
Batteries
Into the human body. Is it completely unreasonable to ask whether that system could serve a dual safety purpose?
The Obvious Objections
Privacy. Huge one. Security. Also huge. Abuse potential. Absolutely.
You don’t want implantable tracking to become the next dystopian headline.
But that doesn’t invalidate the engineering conversation.
It just means it needs to be done thoughtfully.
I’m Not Claiming a Breakthrough
Let me be clear.
I’m not saying: “This would absolutely work.”
I’m not saying: “I’ve solved search and rescue.”
I’m saying: I saw an article. My brain started doing what it does.And I’m genuinely curious whether RF engineers, medical device designers, or SDR folks have kicked this idea around.
Because if RAM can leak secrets through electromagnetic radiation…
If air-gapped systems aren’t truly silent…
Then maybe medical telemetry isn’t as one-dimensional as we think either.
Sometimes the Value Is Just the Question
There’s something healthy about asking: What can this thing really do?
Not to exploit it. Not to sensationalize it. But to understand it better.
If nothing else, this whole conversation reminds us that hardware always lives at the intersection of code and physics. And physics doesn’t care about our assumptions. So I’ll throw it out there...
RF folks. Medical device engineers. SDR hobbyists. Is this crazy? Is it plausible? Has it already been explored and discarded? I don’t know. But it feels like a conversation worth having and sometimes that’s enough.
Comments