Submitting a review for consideration is easy; please first read Slashdot's book review guidelines. Updated: 2008114 by samzenpus
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
Not me (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not me (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Also we are currently testing out the Microsoft solution for this, as Electronic Health Record stuff is getting to be a very big deal and we don't want to be left behind...
More and more vendors are doing IE
Re:Safe Now With Windoze? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's basically common knowledge, what GP is saying. I clearly remember watching both what my dentist's and my GP's secretaries used to type in my data, and it was obviously a client running on a Windows box. In the case of my dentist, there's a whole Windows dental information suite that he runs, which shows him x-rays and everything. He has multiple rooms with dentist's chairs, and each contains an apparently-identical computer; he can view x-rays and records at any of them, so they are obviously networked. How likely is it that this network is separated from the Internet by anything more than a consumer-grade router? Not very.
How much of a threat really is this, relative to tapes left in cars overnight, or the sloppy (or malicious) use of thumb drives? My gut says, "not a huge one," but I don't really know.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Security concern becomes of a whole different order of magnitude when dental, medical, and mental health information all get chunked into the same system, then it becomes kind of like a Real ID for health; convenient one-stop shopping for all your privacy-invading needs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not me (Score:4, Interesting)
what about selling health information to other entities. Maybe they don't sell the identifying bits, but even regional data can have an enormous impact on your ability to get health and life insurance, the premiums you pay, etc. Insurance carriers already track regional trends, but more data means better predictions.
Look, corporate entities, and never, ever forget that Google is a corporate entity, have to make money and think about how they will do that.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Not me (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Insurance companies: "Thank you for choosing Overabarrel Insurance, Co. Your policy is enclosed. Because your father and uncle had colon cancer, your monthly premium will be $10,000/month."
2) Employers: "You're a great programmer, but we can't bring you on full-time. Your records show that your father and uncle had colon cancer, and we can't afford to take on the risk of our insurance premiums going through the roof if you get it."
Essentially, health status can be a significant driver of discrimination in many different forms. The less someone knows about your health status (or your relatives health status), the hard it is for them to discriminate against you.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not me (Score:4, Interesting)
1) When you get insurance as an individual, if you have a previously existing medical condition, and you manage to conceal it, they won't dig hard. They'll just take your money. When it comes time to make a claim, it WILL come out then, and they will refuse to cover you, even though they took your money. Transparency in medical records will protect people from doing this to themselves.
2) When you get group insurance, personal medical records don't come into it at all. Not at all. They calculate the risks based on the probability that any employee will require treatment based entirely on their demographic. That is what makes group insurance plans so appealing in the first place.
I used to sell the stuff for a brief period of time, until I learned how it really worked and realized I wouldn't be able to look myself in the mirror if I didn't get out of that industry. I know what I'm talking about.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
How will they prove it was preexisting if it was never documented anywhere (e.g. MIB, Google's big brother database, or what have you)?
Because the medical records are there, and have always been there. They aren't actually hard to find, it just takes time, so they don't bother to do it when you apply. They wait till they've gotten 10,000 of your money and are going to have to pay out 1,000,000 to care for you, then they pay someone to spend
Re: (Score:2)
If you open a hair salon with 20 hair stylists, they don't assess the 20 stylists for risk.
What they do is consult their actuary tables and determine the likelihood that someone will become ill or die based on their records for all hair stylists from all companies they have done business with in that industry over the last hundred years.
That is how they determine risk in groups. It doesn't have anything to do with the individual group, but on the demographic of the group.
Re: (Score:2)
2) In my experience, that is an outright falsehood. Cite a source.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Google stores your information securely and privately. We will never sell your data. You are in control, you choose what you want to share and what you want to keep private.
Also it is not like g
FTC regulations cover them which is likely better (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, I believe an organization which changes a policy must ask their members to re-accept their policies under FTC regs.
Re: (Score:2)
Do people really have so many diseases it takes a computer program to organize them?
Unless you're really old, in which case you probably don't even own a computer. Would you need one to write down "don't forget take your blood pressure pills" or "remember to check your pee for diabetes"?
Or maybe you had a weird accident, in which case you would write "healthy, except for that nasty missi
Re: (Score:2)
But think of the benefits... (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft's HealthVault.com policies comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's examine Microsoft's HealthVault.com policies and how they compare to Google Health.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Microsoft's HealthVault.com policies comparison (Score:4, Informative)
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 4:22 PM
To: XXXXXXXXX
Subject: RE: Health Vault Privacy
Dear Mr. XXXXX,
Our sincere apologies for the long delay in providing you a response to your inquiry.
Because HIPAA applies to organizations and not products, HealthVault and HealthVault Search do not fall under its purview. Microsoft is not waiting for regulations to define our privacy and security practices. Microsoft made the decision early on to set rigorous privacy policies for these products.
Health information technology is evolving rapidly and privacy remains a central concern. Core to Microsoft's privacy principles is our belief that health information is most effectively protected when consumer are at the center of the healthcare system and in control of their information.
Microsoft supports a comprehensive federal approach to privacy legislation. We believe federal privacy legislation should include four key elements to help protect consumer privacy, and to support businesses' privacy policies and compliance efforts. First, there should be a uniform baseline standard that applies across all organizations and industries. Second, any legislation must increase the transparency regarding collection, use and disclosure of personal information. Third, individuals must have meaningful control over the use and disclosure of personal information. Finally, we believe there should be minimum-security requirements around the storage and transit of personal information.
Best regards,
HSG Privacy Team
From: XXXXXXXXXXXX
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 10:36 AM
To: HSG Privacy
Subject: Health Vault Privacy
I noticed while going through the privacy statement there was no reference to HIPAA. With something as personal as one's medical records, HIPAA compliance is a must! http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/ [hhs.gov]
Also, I would not be surprised to see a company offer some sort of beneficial tracking program, and then use the data they get through authorization to deny insurance or raise premiums. With advertising being the primary reason for the service, the probability of misuse would be relatively high, I would think.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Both Google and Microsoft are engaged in transmitting healthcare information.
Correct Citation (Score:2)
Loophole? (Score:5, Funny)
So the only thing protecting personal health information at Google Health is internal policy and "Don't be evil"? I guess that means they'll protect your PHI--as long as you're not a dissident in China.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
By the time this has all panned out, there won't be any illusions of privacy, only an ever increasing number of people getting their information bought and sold and revealed all over the place until they finally demand to be in on the "knowing whats going on" like everyone else and demand a social order that doesn't revolve around secrets and leverage.
Go Google! Gather it all and screw up keeping control like you usually do!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And then they will have to buy their own information just to find out what it is. Doesn't matter that you gave it up for free; if you want to know how it is being used or presented, it will cost you.
It will be kind of like the credit bureaus: you can get a free credit report from them (once a year) but if y
Re:Loophole? (Score:5, Informative)
If Google or any healthcare records storage comapany is being used by a CE and has a contract with that CE, they are a Business Associate. BAs of CEs are subject to the HIPAA Security Rule (the section of HIPAA that is in question and largely referred to about protecting healthcare data).
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
(It's not funny, it's pretty much how Google operates.)
Google Calendar exploit? (Score:2, Interesting)
If anyone is interested please read: http://bramp.net/blog/google-calendar-exploit [bramp.net]
and hopefully if this is a bug it can get passed on to Google.
Re: (Score:2)
Rough Analog (Score:3, Insightful)
To me, this would be akin to plastering my personal medical records on a bulletin board in a busy public place with a single coversheet on each item that says "Private Medical Information: Please don't read this."
Thanks to the military, I had an introduction to very early "on-line" medical records. Yes, you guessed correctly. Those records are "no longer available." Fortunately, I requested copies of every contact and kept those in a personal copy of my medical records.
Oh Geeze...stop hyperventilating (Score:3, Insightful)
Quite frankly I'm tired of people complaining on my behalf. Especially when I don't use whatever is being complained about and when the people complaining don't use it either.
Also..it IS a BETA (test). Once they are out of BETA they might actually have to apply HIPPA.
Re: (Score:2)
I think your first piece of advice is the best piece there blue canary. If you are worried, then don't use it. I personally want as few people as possible handling my medical records.
Oh boy another person with no idea (Score:2)
Besides, see my other 2 posts on this page explaing why HIPAA doesn't matter anyway.
My goodness, you were modded insightful with such mis-information?? way to go mods!
Re: (Score:2)
Whatever factors may conflate to determine whether or not Google Health legally falls under the purview of HIPAA, I assure you that whether the product has a "Beta" in its name is not one of them.
document and image "theft"? (Score:2)
Google managing my medical records? (Score:3, Funny)
What's all the fuss? (Score:4, Informative)
I for one will not be using Google Health for my own records, but that's just me.
Thanks for a real and EDUCATED response! (Score:3, Insightful)
I responded above how actually the word is now that these PHRS and their privacy policies are under FTC regulations. My understanding is that the FTC regulations recourses are actually stronger than the HIPAA ones anyway. All the PHR vendors have privacy and data use policies tha
Re: (Score:2)
Or not. The whole idea is to make the records available to anyone who needs them, such as emergency personnel in the distant town you're visiting when you're unconscious. (I'm not making that one up; it's one of the favorite selling points for these access-anywhere databases.)
It's a great idea, but of course it only works if every EMT on the planet has access to your records. You can calculate
Exactly! Medical Records in my Wallet! (Score:2, Insightful)
>> Allow Google to store your ePHI is no different than asking a friend to hold onto your paper medical records.
I keep a list of my wifes allergies and medications in my wallet in case of an emergency. Yeah on a piece of paper in my wallet. So having them available online is just convienent. So I guess someone could steal my wallet too.
Also, as if a gave a crap who knows my medical history. You people have 12 deadbolts on your doors too? Paraniod much???
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And then there is a large portion of the industry which no one really looks at anyway. Right now a good portion of medical records are shipped to part-time home workers to transcribe audio
Google and Do Evil (Score:3, Interesting)
I always had a problem with a company with the value statement of 'Do no evil' who doesn't spell out what that means in detail. I was listening to Stafford's Entrepreneurial Thought Leaders series this weekend and Google.org was discussing using their engineering talent to recognize epidemics before anyone else. My guess is this is how Google plans to do it. It is clear Google intends to use this data, but I think has done a poor job defining exactly how. Add in the fact that Google has bowed to governments for information on their citizens and I end up with a cold chill. Working in the health care industry, I see the value of patient records that are easy to transfer for the patient, but I am not sure this is the way. The little security analyst in me is screaming bloody murder.
Want access to thousands of Google accounts? (Score:2, Insightful)
1. Start a website requiring users to sign up with email addresses and passwords
2. Go through your DB and get a list of all the gmail ones
3. Try logging in with the gmail usernames and the passwords they gave your site
4. Over half of them will probably work
5. PROFIT!!!!!!
Last time I tried this, I picked about 10 at random. Six worked. I have thousands of gmail accounts in my users table. Lucky I'm not a black hat.
S
who where when (Score:2)
we're sorry Mr. JoeSixpack we Googled your health record and shows you are not qualified for the position and we already filled the position with a sterilized android...
The necessary results of a fragmented system (Score:3, Insightful)