Trump Launching a New Private Health Tracking System With Big Tech's Help 178
fjo3 shares a report from the Associated Press: The Trump administration announced it is launching a new program that will allow Americans to share personal health data and medical records across health systems and apps run by private tech companies, promising that will make it easier to access health records and monitor wellness. More than 60 companies, including major tech companies like Google, Amazon and Apple as well as health care giants like UnitedHealth Group and CVS Health, have agreed to share patient data in the system. The initiative will focus on diabetes and weight management, conversational artificial intelligence that helps patients, and digital tools such as QR codes and apps that register patients for check-ins or track medications.
Officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, who will be in charge of maintaining the system, have said patients will need to opt in for the sharing of their medical records and data, which will be kept secure. Those officials said patients will benefit from a system that lets them quickly call up their own records without the hallmark difficulties, such as requiring the use of fax machines to share documents, that have prevented them from doing so in the past.
Popular weight loss and fitness subscription service Noom, which has signed onto the initiative, will be able to pull medical records after the system's expected launch early next year. That might include labs or medical tests that the app could use to develop an AI-driven analysis of what might help users lose weight, CEO Geoff Cook told The Associated Press. Apps and health systems will also have access to their competitors' information, too. Noom would be able to access a person's data from Apple Health, for example. "Right now you have a lot of siloed data," Cook said.
Officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, who will be in charge of maintaining the system, have said patients will need to opt in for the sharing of their medical records and data, which will be kept secure. Those officials said patients will benefit from a system that lets them quickly call up their own records without the hallmark difficulties, such as requiring the use of fax machines to share documents, that have prevented them from doing so in the past.
Popular weight loss and fitness subscription service Noom, which has signed onto the initiative, will be able to pull medical records after the system's expected launch early next year. That might include labs or medical tests that the app could use to develop an AI-driven analysis of what might help users lose weight, CEO Geoff Cook told The Associated Press. Apps and health systems will also have access to their competitors' information, too. Noom would be able to access a person's data from Apple Health, for example. "Right now you have a lot of siloed data," Cook said.
Trump (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Trump (Score:5, Funny)
Don't be silly. It will be a well known medical expert; Robert F Kennedy Jr.
Re: Trump (Score:2)
What does this have to do with Trump or his opinions on your health? It's about putting EHR in a system so healthcare providers can access them if needed.
It's not run by government (it's private)...
It has nothing to do with suggesting treatments (it's a storage system for healthcare records)...
Re: Trump (Score:4, Informative)
Oh? You trust el Bunko to spawn anything without a trail of dollars leading to his pockets? How daft must you be to trust him with anything, especially health information. Regardless of how he's packaged the plan, he'll get his cut.
El Bunko’s Bunks
1. Sneakers
2. NFTs with him doing stupid shit
3. Watches
4. Fragrances
5. Cabinet positions: he promises “cabinet advisory positions” to the Maggots in emails, all you need to get one is contribute to him.
6. Bibles
7. His "media company".....just announced they "lost" $400 million in the last year. That's $400 million of other people's money he and his cronies have made off with.
8. The el Bunko guitar
9. Shirts with he and Elmo on them
10. Gold one dollar bills
11. Gold Bars
12. Siphoning money from criminal seizures into a National “Strategic” Bitcoin Reserve thereby increasing money into the shitcoin industry and his own shitcoins.
13. Cabinet positions for his billionaire “contributors”
14. Advertising Teslas on the White House lawn. The Bunk: Elmo announced he’s putting another $100 million into el Bunko’s political operation.
15. $447,000 Birken Crocodile Handbag.
16. Golf “tournaments” at his golf course fueled by Saudi money; the Saudis are above corruption in the same way a brick is above the Sargasso Tea (thanx Douglas Adams)
17. Don Jr. has a millionaires club to rich to get inside scoop on new Bunks.
18. Eric has crypt company merging with another so they’ll be listed on Nasdaq.
19. el Bunko’s own crypto so foreign governments and “friends” can contribute directly. United Arab Emirates put $2 billion into the Trump family’s new cryptocurrency outfit, World Liberty Financial.
20. Qatar’s 450 million dollar airplane “gifted” to DoD but he gets to keep it when he leaves office.after DoD tricks it out to make it secure.which they’ll do by first stripping it down and putting it back together again.
21. Auction to dine with el Bunko.
22. Qatar chipped in to help finance a Trump-branded beachside golf and luxury villa project in the country worth $5.5 billion.
23. el Bunko hotels for housing foreign “dignitaries”.
24. Selling pardons, sort of like the Catholic Church selling “Indulgences”.
25. A “gold-plated” phone ostensibly made in the U.S.
1. Value so far to el Bunko Crime family from Jan. 20, 2025: $2.8 Billion. This is an old figure from last May. Now it is quite a bit more, and he'll gets his own jet which will be tricked out with the latest in security before he runs off with it to Maggot-Land.
All of his tat is made in China. And he is hawking it now from the Oval Orifice.
Re: (Score:3)
The funniest part about golf is him getting a trophy at the course he owns.
Re: Trump (Score:3)
Re: Trump (Score:4, Informative)
And in times past - specifically the health care debates during the Clinton and Obama administrations - whenever EHRs were discussed, the GOP went apeshit about the government involvement in such things. But the GOP is a bunch of compliant browbeaten lickspittle lackeys these days, even when they know better. So whatever the boss man says...
Re: (Score:3)
Many months late, after private interests and charities already started developing vaccines, and without any plan for deployment. To the extend Warp Speed helped at all, it was because Biden deployed the vaccines. Trump's plan was for COVID to kill democrats.
And refusing the vaccine is MAGA's game, "the shot" was a success despite Trump, not because of Trump.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Just wait until it becomes mandatory. The party of Small Government (TM) really wants to regulate your healthcare, especially if you are a woman or transgender.
Right (Score:5, Insightful)
This totally won't be used to spy on women who get abortions, people who seek gender affirming care, or other mental health issues. Let me guess, the first question it asks is your citizenship status?
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And when the Democrats win, nothing will be "undone". They'll keep it all, make some social tweeks, but the systems will remain in place. That's just government and the people that want to run in just use ideology to get to power.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would the government care if you got hair transplants?
Re: Right (Score:4, Informative)
Are the Epstein files on that server?
Except Trump currently violating the privacy (Score:5, Insightful)
He is ignoring the privacy of all undocumented people, using health information to track them down. Note, this is not just for people that have been convicted, but for accused.
Given his current practices only an idiot would give anyone access to their health information, rather get the info yourself and hand deliver it to the people that need it.
WTF? (Score:2, Insightful)
They're NOT just "missing some papers"... they have no right to HAVE such papers; They're here in the country ILLEGALLY, having broken-in in complete disregard for US law, and the opinions of the American people. They KNOW they are doing wrong, and they are doing it anyway - it's in-your-face lawlessness They do not show ANY consideration to the opinions of the American people. Furthermore, they're not just innocently lurking here without a piece of paper... they're either working here ILLEGALLY and using s
Re:WTF? (Score:5, Informative)
Somebody who breaks into your house, starts eating the food in your fridge, and pocketing part of your paycheck, is NOT an "undocumented family member", that's a hostile act of passive-aggressive behavior by a criminal intruder, and it's the absolute duty of the government to kick them out.
Except that's not what's happening. You seem to have a mighty big house with lots of people, some of which are inviting desperate folks to "break in" to work for them. When they do, they work hard, buy their own food, pay taxes, doing work in "your house" that you & other members of your massive house don't seem to want to do.
Those "evil employers" are the real problem. Even those that are requiring a S.S. card as they can easily check legal status with E-Verify. They are the real criminals. Here & there they arrest some bakery owner or a restaurant manager, but big business gets a pass.
Re: (Score:2)
When they do, they work hard, buy their own food, pay taxes, doing work in "your house" that you & other members of your massive house don't seem to want to do.
I do truly believe this describes most illegal immigrants in the US, and most of them are good people. I say this as a non-American, but I also totally fail to see how this justifies what is clearly and knowingly breaking the law. If I either surreptitiously crossed the US border, or went through a normal crossing and overstayed my stated length, I would fully expect them to throw my ass out when they found me (and I would NOT be surprised when they came looking for me either). It is totally true the US has
Re: (Score:2)
Oh really and you thing e-verify is useful?
Old Orchard Beach Police Chief Elise Chard said the department used E-Verify to hire Officer Jon Luke Evans.
“As part of the hiring process, the Town reviewed multiple forms of identification, including photo identification, and submitted Evans’ I-9 form to the Department of Homeland Security’s E-Verify Program. The Department of Homeland Security then verified that Evans was authorized to work in the U.S. The form was submitted and approved by DHS
Re:WTF? (Score:5, Informative)
Meanwhile in reality, undocumented immigrants in the US paid an estimated $96.7 billion in federal, state, and local taxes [itep.org] - over a third of that to programs including Social Security and Medicare that they are barred from using. They are subsidizing you. They aren't "eating the food in your fridge and pocketing your paycheck", they're being forced to put food in your fridge and subsidize your paycheck. You live off the sweat of THEIR brows.
As for pushing down wages, studies consistently find that's bullshit [nber.org] - immigration raises wages for locals:
1) First off, low-wage work faces chronic labor shortages, and labour shortages undercut the economy. For example, the construction industry in the US alone is forecast to have a half-million person labour shortage [abc.org] this year. That sort of thing is devastating in terms of lost potential economic growth - the absolute worst thing you can do is deliberately make that shortage worse.
2) Secondly, economies are not zero-sum games. Work creates wealth. Which then gets spent and taxed, and that creates new value; jobs don't get "consumed", they just create more. Depending on your economy, lowering the cost of production does one of two (functionally) equivalent things as a net whole: either they lower the cost of goods and services [uchicago.edu] (e.g. meaning your existing wages buy more), OR the cost of goods and services remain the same but wages rise. Or to put it another way: if you grow the economy in a manner that the lower-wage jobs are being filled, then that economic growth involves shifting everyone else on net average into higher-wage positions.
Furthermore: immigrants have higher rates of entrepreneurship [americanim...ouncil.org] than the native-born. Less than 1 in 8 native-born people will start a business, but 1 in 4 immigrants will. This sort of "economic melting pot" environment has fueled America for its entire history. Immigrant-started businesses have similar rates of success as native-started businesses, but are less likely to imitate and focus more on R&D [nber.org].
Yes, many employers of undocumented workers are exploitative, but they're exploitative of them. The proper response is to create a regularized legal framework for immigrant labour. The reality is that the US absolutely relies on said labour for its economy and quality of life, while at the same time providing no legal framework for said labour to arrive and exist in the country. It's a legal absurdity.
You have to understand how your economy works. Your economic success has overwhelmingly been built on two things:
1) "Brain-draining" other countries (H1B, attracting foreign college students who end up staying with their advanced degrees, etc); and
2) Low-cost labour, to keep the cost of production down.
What you want to do is kill off your entire economic success model. It's utterly insane self-foot-shooting on your part. These things flood money into your economy and into your government coffers. And you want to turn off the spigot. You have every right to be mad about the low end of this being structured around an undocumented economy, but the way to fix that is to make it into a documented economy. You accurately identify a problem, but have an entirely backwards "solution" to it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Second, they are a net drain on the economy because they send more money back home than they add to GDP.
Third, the correct and legal term is "illegal alien". "Undocumented migrant" is a BS euphemism invented by left-wing reporters to support a political agenda.
Re:WTF? (Score:4, Informative)
I had no idea that slaves were free to go at any time. And if your concern is abusive employers, then the solution to that is regulation and oversight.
Undocumented migrants to the US go through great risk to get employment opportunities that, while terrible from the perspective of US norms, are far more than they have available at home. That's why they come in the first place. What they DON'T want is, just to pick a random example, a masked gestapo kidnapping them in front of their children and throwing them into something its creators lovingly refer to as "Alligator Alcatraz". They came to work.
Asserting things flatly in contradiction with the research does not make it true. Once again, to repeat: the economy is not a zero-sum game. Labour creates wealth; it does not redistribute from some fixed pool. Their labor creates wealth in the US, but they are given only a tiny fraction of that. And on that they pay taxes for services that they are barred from receiving. From the pittiance they have left, the majority furthermore gets spent within the US.
Total remittances from the US [ejiltalk.org] amount to $98B; this is a mixture of remittances from undocumented workers and documented. Documented immigrants are vastly more common than undocumented (14,1% of the US population vs. 3,2%) and tend to earn much higher salaries (though they remit a smaller % of them), so only a relatively small fraction of that (a few tens of billions) is from undocumented workers. In terms of the share of the workforce, 6,7% of the workforce [cis.org] is undocumented and 18,6% are all immigrants combined [cmsny.org]. Keep these numbers in mind when you look at the next number: the US economy is 30 TRILLION dollars. E.g. the value that undocumented workers remit is in the ballpark one-thousandth of the economy, yet they're 1 in 15 workers. The value that all immigrant workers remit is in the ballpark of 1/300th of the economy, and they're one in five workers. And remember that it is work that creates wealth.
There simply is no comparison: the amount that undocumented workers contribute to the economy is vastly, by orders of magnitude, more than they earn, let alone remit.
"Undocumented migrant" is not modern, did not originate in the US, and has its roots in academic and international discourse. It is the preferable language of the UN since 1975 [unhcr.org], aka half a century. Alien [wikipedia.org]" is a perfectly valid legal term, although "illegal alien" is rarely used in the US code (the US has a wide range of alien categories referenced in the code, including "resident and nonresident", "immigrant and nonimmigrant", "asylee and refugee", etc aliens). "Unauthorized alien" is probably the most common adjective phrase, although just "alien" is more common still (for example: 18 U.S.C. 1325, "Unauthorized Entry by Alien"). "Migrant" and "alien" are not synonyms, and require unique terminology - migrant is much more specific, and "migrant worker" more specific still. "Illegal" is malformed terminology and commonly inaccurate. For example
Re:WTF? (Score:4, Informative)
You made a false claim about the origin of the terminology. You should care about being factually accurate.
It literally is not. That term, while it exists in the US code, is incommon. The most common term in the US code is just "alien", and when specifically discussing the undocumented, "Unauthorized Alien". I didn't include a discussion of US code just so you could pretend it didn't exist.
I'm struggling to understand what your argument is. You seem to be declaring that any job involving cotton is inherently slavery, even if the people are free to come and go as they choose and are paid for their labour. If that's not your argument, then please clarify, as otherwise, I'm baffled.
Democrats (aka, the party that is constantly pushing for bills for higher minimum wages and mandates for better working conditions, while the Republicans do the opposite, pushing deregulation) want above all a regularized system with rules and oversight to prevent abuses. Most also want a path to citizenship for people who work for a given number of years with no criminal record (7 years is a common number suggested, though even decades would be better than "never"), though this is secondary to the primary issue. What Democrats do not want is a masked gestapo kidnapping people who want to be in the US working, from in front of their children, and throwing them into "Alligator Alcatraz".
These things are the exact same thing that the immigrants themselves want. You can't sit here and pretend to be an advocate for immigrants when arguing for policies that they are opposed to and opposing policies that they support.
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile in reality, undocumented immigrants in the US paid an estimated $96.7 billion in federal, state, and local taxes [itep.org] - over a third of that to programs including Social Security and Medicare that they are barred from using. They are subsidizing you. They aren't "eating the food in your fridge and pocketing your paycheck", they're being forced to put food in your fridge and subsidize your paycheck. You live off the sweat of THEIR brows.
total taxes in 2022 (year used in your source) was ~$7t.
~$100b would be 1.4% of all taxes.
illegal immigrants make up 3 - 4% of the population.
there's nothing impressive here.
also, they'd be paying more taxes were they here legally, as would their employers.
immigrants have higher entrepreneurship rates, yes--but we're discussing illegal immigrants.
lumping legal/illegal together to appear to help your argument to an unscrupulous reader is disingenuious.
as for the rest, the US is the #1 immigration dest
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"... they have no right to HAVE such papers;"
What right do you have to those papers?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: WTF? (Score:2, Funny)
Ah yes, my fruit picking neighbors
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> You're scared of Trump, your neighbors are scared
> of losing their jobs or seeing their wages cut
> because Democrats want to import cheap, illegal,
> labor. One of you has a legitimate concern.
Oh, what jobs are they scared of losing? I don't see trump supporters giving up their cushy suburban McMansions en masse to go live in a bunkhouse in Salinas and pick lettuce for 14 hours a day. When that does happen, THEN you can get back to us about the "threats" to people's jobs. And no, my neighbor
Re: (Score:2)
He is ignoring the privacy of all suspected people.
Fixed that for you. This administration does not seem to care whether a person is actually undocumented by the cases where they deported citizens and legal residents.
Re: Except Trump currently violating the privacy (Score:4, Informative)
Oh wow, why didn't they think of that! Just "come here legally" - it's so simple! Please share with everyone your brilliant plan that nobody thought of! *eyeroll*
And FYI, "being in the US illegally" is only a civil offense. And your entire economy is built around the existence of these people, who subsidize your government paying taxes on services they're legally barred from collecting, and creating vastly more wealth than they're paid (which then goes back into your economy, because economies are not zero-sum games). They're also disinflationary, lowering the costs of goods and services. And tend to work in fields that have chronic massive labour shortages (ag, food processing, construction, etc - there's generally a huge labour deficit there).
If you want to know what happens if you slash production but don't slash consumption, simply look at what happened to inflation the world over in the years following the COVID pandemic.
That conspiracy theory is (A) illegal, and (B) logistically unfounded.
Illegal immigrants cannot vote. In case that's unclear, perhaps all caps will help: ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS CANNOT VOTE. Only citizens can vote. The punishment for illegally registering or voting is not a slap on the wrist. It includes fines, imprisonment, and, crucially for an immigrant, deportation and being permanently barred from ever gaining legal citizenship. The risk is immense for the "reward" of casting a single, statistically insignificant ballot - not least of which because the vast majority of the immigrant population doesn't live in swing states to begin with.
To register to vote, you must attest under penalty of perjury (felony) that you are a U.S. citizen. Most states require some form of documentation like a driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number to register, which non-citizens and undocumented immigrants do not have.
There has been study after study after study on the notion of widespread illegal voting, and every single time, it's found to be mythical. Even the goddamn Heritage Foundation's own database (which they collect to argue for stricter voting laws) shows that it's a myth. They track every case of voter fraud in every election, and all years together from all sources of voter fraud (not simply "noncitizen votes"), there's only about 1100 cases during a timeperiod were 3 billion votes were cast, and that's overplaying it [brennancenter.org] (it's not ~1100 cases of ineligible people, but includes everything from vote buying to interfering to intimidation to improper voting assistance). The Heritage Foundation itself has only 41 cases of noncitizens casting votes. A voter is more likely to be struck by lightning [brennancenter.org] than to cast a fraudulent vote.
And to reiterate, this isn't some grand conspiracy, it's because it's the worst tradeoff imaginable. The benefits for casting a fraudulent ballot are tiny. You have almost zero chance of swinging the election even in a swing state, let alone a red or blue state. If you even care about the election at all. The penalties, by contrast, are extremely high, especially for a noncitizen. And it's easy to get caught (registration requires verifiable personal information that is easy to crosscheck, and indeed is *designed* for crosschecking - see ERIC for example - then onsite against poll books - plus there's a ton of other things like the "jury duty trap" (jury duty is drawn from the poll lists but then leads to cross-referencing the individual)). It's like trying to hold
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I don't give the faintest shit about their rights. Not an iota
Their rights ARE YOUR RIGHTS. it's one and the same package, and they DO have rights.
a civil infraction is not a license for dictatorship as much as you may want to fluff the dictator.
You seem really eager to give up YOUR RIGHTS because someone else is using them at the moment.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at you post history, it's not surprising you don't care about rights.
Sounds like the "Epic" healthcare system (Score:4, Interesting)
I visited another unrelated medical group last month. It was independent of my primary medical group. They had access to ALL of my medical history and prescriptions *without my permission given*. The system's name is "Epic" and is used in California and likely other states.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Epic has an opt-in for sharing your data with other independent-but-also-an-Epic-client groups. I'm guessing that, at some point, you probably did check that box. At least, I know when I changed docs a couple years ago, my new doc tried but could not access my previous info - until I went in to the system myself and enabled it.
Another possibility is that the two independent groups are either subsidiaries of a shared parent, or else both are getting their Epic access from a single source.
Re: (Score:2)
Neither case is true. I didn't give permission and the medical groups are completely unrelated.
Re: (Score:2)
Epic has an opt-in for sharing your data
Which then makes it a "Third Party Record" and can therefore be accessed by government using the same process as cell phone Geo Fence Warrants; frequently en mass; frequently with the thinnest of probable cause. Like many ideas, the pure and stated objective is a worthy one, one that "we all agree" is for the good. Too frequently, others see that effort as an avenue to accomplish their objectives as well, that are not in line with the original objective. "Mission Creep" is as real in law as anywhere else.
Th
Re:Sounds like the "Epic" healthcare system (Score:2)
The checkbox for Epic is usually softly worded as "sharing your health information with our partners..."
Opt-Out.
Re: Sounds like the "Epic" healthcare system (Score:3)
This is exactly where the problem lies. There's a set of standards defined by an ANSI-certified group called HL7 that should make it all possible to transfer medical data. But the vendors, eg Epic, want to keep control, charge for exchange.
When I walk into a specialist's office, I should be able to click on the health info sharing app, select WHAT data to share, tap the NFC device on the receptionist's counter, do the MFA shuffle, then OK yes share that data with that provider.
Re: (Score:2)
>"When I walk into a specialist's office, I should be able to click on the health info sharing app, select WHAT data to share, tap the NFC device on the receptionist's counter, do the MFA shuffle, then OK yes share that data with that provider."
There are MAJOR problems with the current data sharing, as you point out. Where I am, *ALL* the hospitals and tons of other facilities use EPIC. And if your data is in one, every other site has access to *everything* about you, without your explicit permission o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tell your congresscritters: (Score:5, Insightful)
1) patients must control who sees what. Your dentist doesn't need to know you went to Illinois for an abortion, gender counseling, etc.
2) No AI harvesting. No marketing. No ad targeting based on your medical data.
3) only medical treatment should be able to request medical data. Not your landlord, not your educators, not your employer
4) it's your private data, it has to be carefully controlled.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Laws change, interpretations of laws change, enforcement of laws change. Once the data exists in their control there is no clawing it back.
Re: (Score:2)
For you to say that things change, no, that is just wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
"everybody is held up to one set of rules."
When has that ever happened?
Re: (Score:2)
4) it's your private data, it has to be carefully controlled.
They don't care. They have to do what the System tells them to do. Their jobs depend on taking care of the System since it is the System that 'guarantees' votes and such. You writing a letter to your person in Congress merely shows that some people are unhappy. Members of Congress don't have to worry about that due to gerrymandering and other methods of voter suppression.
I am not truly up to date, but look at Senator John Fetterman for an example. He appeared to be a real person for the people, but once his
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
>"The insight that I have is that America is an Oligarchy now"
It isn't just "now". Where have you been? It has been that way for decades. Not just corporate but special-interest groups folded in. And Congress outsources their power to their unelected agencies and to the Executive so they don't have to make or be accountable for any difficult decisions. Then wrap up all the decisions they do make into massive bills that nobody reads or understands, that melds everything together so, again, no single
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
By electing Trump you have signaled to them that 34 felonies and 26 credible Rape accusations isn't a deal breaker in the face of overwhelming propaganda and a handful of moral panics.
34 felonies? Care to share what the underlying felony was that elevated the 34 misdemeanors that were well-past their statutory limit was? Leticia James seems incapable of explaining that.
And define "credible" - the most famous case, the case of E Jean Carrol, the victim couldn't even remember what YEAR she was allegedly attacked - is that "credible"? And I'm pretty sure you inflated 26 claim of sexual abuse, ranging from looking lustfully to groping and made them all rapes.
You don't have to like Trump, but
Re:The Republicans could care less (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Listening to CNN makes you misinformed.
"You don't have to like Trump, but when you lie about what he's done you only undermine any influence your argument might have over anyone."
And this is the reason I pretty much don't believe a word of anything any more when it comes to Trump or politics in general. And now, since the 34 felonies nonsense, I find I can't even believe the results of court proceedings. The trial was massively flawed, so I have to wait until 27 different appeals courts all disagree abo
Re:The Republicans could care less (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The goal of the Trump and Russian misinformation game is to make you just not believe in anything. To make your mind melt. Go back to the Original Documents of the United States of America. The Constitution of the United States. WE the People... Read Benjamin Franklin writings. The greatness that we can be. Don't buy into the trump mish mash bullshit of lies.
The Republican Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
Re: (Score:2)
experience with CVS's IT (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, let's see what my experience has been over 20 years: (1) their webpage didn't show one of my prescriptions. The tech support person said "I see it, but it's not the same as the screenshot you sent me." To her credit, she worked really hard for about 6 weeks, before finally punting this to their Tier 2 tech support. The Tier 2 people promptly changed my password and forgot to tell me. (2) The voice response system would not offer one of my prescriptions when it was time to renew. I always had to "add another prescription" and manually enter the Rx number. (3) The voice response system was also very sensitive to background noise. (4) No matter how many times I said "DO NOT AUTO-REFILL" and the pharmacy clerks removed that, their automated system would auto-order prescriptions, often a month or more before I needed it. (Of course, the one I would want auto-ordered was the one from #2 that the system never would order without my calling it in.) (5) Then the voice response system removed the "speak to pharmacist" option, replacing it was "leave a message and maybe we'll call you back." (6) The latest change was all voice, no "say Yes or press 1". That system hung up on me when I tried to refill a prescription. And I watched the people behind the counter struggle too. "Oh, we can't do this here, you have to go to another terminal where I log into a different system" I could see they were as frustrated as I was.
When the auto system hung up on me (without ordering my refill), that was the final straw. I switched to a local grocery store pharmacy. They CAN'T BE ANY WORSE. CVS is the only company I've been a customer of where the IT got PROGRESSIVELY WORSE OVER TIME.
And they're going to fix national heath care? That alone would make me consider moving back to Canada and its health system... (But as bad as CVS is, they're just incompetent. Palantir scares the shit out of me.)
I am glad I live on primitive LatAm (Score:2)
Where my medical history is in the form of paper, plastic and CDs that doctors give me. That's shit, but is less shit than Apple or Noom geting my labs by using incessant pushing and dark patterns..
In the USoA,IIRC, the department of Veteran Affaires had a FOSS system that could allow medical institutions (not silicon valley gallavanting cow-boys) share data between themselves, on a need to know basis, but the initiative was never driven to fruition neither by elephants nor by mules. That, I'd have gotten b
Re: (Score:2)
Apple can have my lab work. What do I care? What are they going to do? Charge me more because my health sucks?
Re: (Score:3)
Me personally, I would like the Government of the USA to be like the Biden Administration, where I felt like they put opportunities in front of me, instead of worrying about being punished for something I might have done in the past.
Re: (Score:2)
Combine that with all of your information as to what you eat, where you drive, and the Trump administration may say that you are just harming yourself, and you do not deserve any health care, or food, or shelter.
That may very well be. I could also win the Powerball or be struck by lightning. I'm not worried about any of those things.
Me personally, I would like the Government of the USA to be like the Biden Administration, where I felt like they put opportunities in front of me, instead of worrying about being punished for something I might have done in the past.
I just want it to keep people from coming to the country illegally, kick out people who are here illegally and keep inflation under control. If it does that? Hell, it can make all the money "on the side" that it wants to as far as I am concerned.
Re: (Score:3)
Immigrants is what makes America Great.
Yes it is. Immigrants are awesome. I love immigrants! I loved one of them so much that I married her.
But you know what? She came here LEGALLY. That's all I want. Legal immigrants.
If the current law is deficient (however "deficient" is defined), then fine, change the law. But don't just fucking ignore the law and allow it to be broken at will. Fuck that. It's a kick in the face to every immigrant to did follow the law.
If the govt won't change the law, attempt to elect one that will. If you can't, then acc
Allow is a funny way to spell require (Score:2)
I am looking forward to the cult coming up with justifications why this is okay though.
If the Democrats actually had a proper propaganda machine then Republican spaces would be filled with this and talk of the mark of the beast. But we don't so...
I'll make it easy (Score:2)
No need to track me. I'll just tell you.
My health really sucks. I have a terminal illness and expect to be dead in 6-12 months.
So, stick that in your algorithm and see what it says.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it may sound attractive, but let me tell you what. It's not. I wouldn't wish it on anybody.
Yes, I have a doctor. In January (2025) he gave me a letter indicating that he would be surprised if I make it another year.
And frankly, I would not care if I didn't have a 9 year old little boy and didn't think every day about how much of his life that I am being absolutely robbed of participating in.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing new (Score:2)
Haven't we been talking about this since before so-called Obamacare?
A provision of the comically named “Affordable Care Act” (Obamacare) mandates all health care providers adopt Electronic Health Records (EHR). That mandate followed a 1997 agreement between EHR developers and the Clinton's Food and Drug Administration. Like most “progressive” (meaning marxist/socialist) ideas, EHR was based on a theory that doesn’t actually work. The theory was that EHR would enhance the quality of care.
Hillary and Bill started the ball rolling, Obama made it a part of Obamacare, and now Trump is embracing the idea... OH NO!!!
I'm curious, where do people think their health records are currently? In a box of paper in their doctors office or are they in their doctors (private) electronic health records system?
It's funny to see how many people can't quite grasp the concept that funding PRIVATE EHR systems DOESNT put their health records in th
Re: (Score:2)
Providers and insurers standardizing on electronic health records for internal use and as-needed sharing is not the same as having them all stored in a centralized system, accessible by a wider variety of people, providers, insurers and agencies - and probably ICE [slashdot.org].
Re: Nothing new (Score:2)
Obamacare included EHR systems so providers could share information - say a NY resident travels to CA and needs care, the CA doctor can access the NY residents EHR. That was a HUGE part of the motivation for EHR in Obamacare (there were others, but this was a major benefit touted).
Obamacare EHR requirements weren't limited to office automation/easier billing.
https://www.coloradohealthinst... [coloradohe...titute.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, this idea is not new.
Why Am I Always 180 Degrees Out of Phase? (Score:2)
I read the synopsis and thought, "Hey, great! If I'm travelling, and end up bleeding to death in Bug Tussle, Nowhere, the doctors there will be able to bring up the fact that I'm using the blood thinner Xarelto, and maybe be able to administer an appropriate coagulant." I was told that this golly-gee-whiz blood thinner was very effective and didn't require diet restrictions I would find difficult (I don't cook), so I continued with it because it fit my lifestyle. But I was also told at the time there is
Secure, except ... (Score:5, Informative)
Officials at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, who will be in charge of maintaining the system, have said patients will need to opt in for the sharing of their medical records and data, which will be kept secure.
Except for any data accessed by ICE... which should bother everyone.
ICE Is Getting Unprecedented Access to Medicaid Data [wired.com]
A new agreement viewed by WIRED gives ICE direct access to a federal database containing sensitive medical data on tens of millions of Americans, with the goal of locating immigrants.
Per the agreement, ICE officials will get login credentials for a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) database containing sensitive medical information, including detailed records about diagnoses and procedures. Language in the agreement says it will allow ICE to access personal information such as home addresses, phone numbers, IP addresses, banking data, and social security numbers. (Later on in the agreement, what ICE is allowed to access is defined differently, specifying just “Medicaid recipients” and their sex, ethnicity, and race but forgoing any mention of IP or banking data.) The agreement is set to last two months. While the document is dated July 9, it is only effective starting when both parties sign it, which would indicate a 60-day span from July 15 to September 15.
The agreement allows ICE to retain any Medicaid data for as long as the agency deems it necessary. The document clarifies that this agreement can be renewed for “consecutive periods,” and that ICE also can share the data so long as the agency specifies who the recipients are in writing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"with the goal of locating immigrants."
No, the goal is locating illegal aliens, not "immigrants". There is a big difference. You might not like the goal, but trying to mask it as all "immigrants", like most of the media does, is disingenuous.
The agreement is for demographic information only, not medical information.
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you trying to protect Medicaid fraud? Why are you promoting the theft of our public resources? This harms you!
What ever happened to confidentiality? (Score:2)
I recall a time when my medical history was between me my doctor and God. How easily we have given up our privacy.
Re: (Score:3)
The pig needs more lipstick (Score:5, Insightful)
Never mind that we have the most unaffordable, miserable excuse of a healthcare system out of any of the supposedly first-world nations. Yep, what we truly needed is *checks notes* big tech getting in on the for-profit medical data privacy rape-a-thon.
It's like some Republican ass kisser somewhere said "Hey, remember when Chevrolet was selling their OnStar telemetry data to a broker, which then in turn resold it to insurers? What if we did the same thing, but with health data?"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What should be done is to increase freedom. (Score:2)
HIPAA (Score:2)
How do they get around HIPAA with this?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That isn't an answer. Try again, this time without the hyperbole.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Groups of masked men who refuse to identify themselves or show documentation whisk people away to hastily built camps. Yeah someone was doing similar things back in the 1940s...
Re: (Score:3)
the "P" in HIPAA is "portability" - the law actually mandates this level of portability and sharing among medical organizations, not prevents it.
Trillions of dollars at play no matter... (Score:2)
WHO is in office and what political party they belong to. These medical and tech giants are determined to get their way. The Clintons tried this, Obama tried it, Some leading "establishment" Republicans wanted it and would have tried it if elected president, and now apparently Trump is about to piss off his base trying it... it seems to be originating this time with Bobby Kennedy and his people who have been doing some very positive stuff and who Trump has apparently come to trust.
I am not asserting any ill
Old initiative, rebranded (Score:2)
Easier to access (Score:2)
Re:Cue the "Everything Trump does is bad" rhetoric (Score:4, Insightful)
Just pretend Obama or Biden pushed this.
Obama did propose this. The reason it didn't happen? It was felt it concentrated too much information in places that could not or would not be effectively controlled, and thus would be abused. Recall please, NO WHERE in US history has law enforcement or information sharing not been abused. You should be able to recall what happened when DOGE did a data suck on Social Security records without understanding the unstructured use of metadata in the record itself (using an impossible birth date to signify they did not actually have a birth date.) You'd realize this yourself if you'd simply recall what the right wing reaction was to a national ID card or requiring a national firearm registry.
As to it being "Opt in" - it will be opt in like credit cards. Sure, you can do without it, but you will not be participating in society without it as others do.
I was able to go eight months without need to use a credit card in 1980. In 2020, I couldn't make it a whole day without someone requiring a credit card for something.
Unlike mandates common with Socialist,
Seems ICE is fully complying with COVID mask mandates now. A little late, and "They're more like "guidelines" than actual rules!" (PotC) Never saw a group of supposedly grown men more afraid of a bit of cloth, nor so persistently confuse the utility of their use.
Now, did you know ICE is a socialist service? It's a government function, preforming a task for people, using money captured by the Government's authority to levy a tax. Same process provides highways, air ports, drug inspections, food safety, 911 emergency services, title recording of property, and sea ports, and in civilized countries, health care.
"Democrat" policies.
I'm happy you put that noun in quotes. It shows you're aware you are using the incorrect part of speech. Perhaps the three decades of pointing this out is finally making progress.
In closing, please contemplate my sig below, written by William Pitt. For extra credit, privately contemplate, compare and contrast what happened with Bob Menendez vs. George Santos or Senator Rick Scott.
Re: (Score:2)
And if you think the presence of government services is Socialist, then you don't know much about political economies. Every system of governance provides public services. It's only Socialist if the state controls the means of production. ICE is not a means of production, it is a law enforcement agency. T
Re: (Score:3)
You use the word government as if it was an entity on its own. We tend to forget it is populated with humans, the same humans populating companies and countries. These humans have the same drivers and vulnerabilities as the other humans. It is not by dehumanizing them we will solve that hurdle.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)