Google to Store Patients' Health Records, Raising Concerns

Associated Press ^

[boxerblues]

There are several but none that do what the Clinic does. I have waited 4 months just to hear what the results of testing was, this after repeated calls to the Doctors. I will be blind by the time they get the records to me or fight with my insurance company to pay for more testing at another facility out of state

[rlmorel]

That is terrible. You called the Physician’s office directly that ordered the exam that was performed on you, and you have not been able to get the result?

[boxerblues]

Yep! All I get is the front desk telling we that the Doctor will call me back as soon as she gets a chance. I have notified the insurance company of what happened hoping that maybe they could help light a fire under them. My only recourse right now is to refuse to pay any bills until I get my test results.

[bukkdems]

“This is great news.”

I agree with this. I am so tired of filling out reams of forms every time I visit a doctor, On lots of questions with doctors I’ve seen for years, I just put “I don’t know, don’t you keep records?” I believe every doctor’s office could save at least $30,000 a year by dismissing one transcriptionist. Bush proposed electronic records to reduce health care costs. However, I want my health insurance company to do it, not Google.

Anyone thinking their records are safe now is delusional. Each day I get errant faxes containing social security numbers, names and the results of tests to determine whether they can keep taking medication for schizophrenia. It is absolutely ridiculous that the medical industry has not moved to electronic records. Faxing private medical information carries far greater risks than password protected computer records.

[LibertyGirl77]

From Matt Cutt’s blog:

“from working at Google for the last 7-8 years, I’ve seen firsthand how much Google works to protect users’ privacy. I personally believe that we take more precautions and safeguards than any other major search engine. We also strongly protect users’ privacy outside of Google (e.g. last year when the DOJ tried to get access to users’ queries, and Google was the only company out of 30+ that said “no” and went to court about it — and won). Note also the recent decision Google made to anonymize user queries after 18-24 months; other search engines haven’t really tackled this topic after Google made its decision. Also bear in mind that even if you sign up for a Google Account, you don’t need much more than an email address to sign up; other search engines ask for much more info.

Another point is that your ISP has a superset of data that Google has, because everything you do passes through your ISP. So your ISP may have much more detailed records about places where you go on the net, plus they have a verified identity with something like a credit card, and they actually know which IPs you’re on. With Google if you clear cookies and turn off your cable modem for a minute or two, you’ll usually get a completely new IP address. Google would have no idea that it’s the same person, but your ISP would still know, because they assigned the new IP address. Many of the questions about privacy I see are interesting because ISPs have more data than Google does, but you rarely see people ask questions about ISPs, even though at least some ISPs do sell clickstream data.”

If you have a home internet connection, your ISP has much more information (and personally identifiable!) about your online travels than Google could ever hope to collect. Yet you never hear people complain about their ISPs, only big bad scary Google.

Unless you only use the internet from anonymous public terminals and never sign up for user accounts, your privacy was gone before you ever made contact with Google. I think people just love to hate Google because it’s been so insanely successful at everything it’s tried. It’s an enormously powerful company, and that terrifies people. It’s the same reason even many conservatives hate “Big Oil,” as someone alluded to above.

[indcons]

“WRONG!”

Maybe.

“I am retired IT (AT&T & BELL LABS) and proud to say hold a US patent for a unique software program with artificial intelligence so I do have some credentials.”

Good for you. In any case, I never questioned your credentials.

“I will never trust the democrats or any government agency with regard to private records.”

Last time I checked, Google fell in neither category (though they are quite leftist in their selection of news items and such).

[LibertyGirl77]

Just to clarify, everything outside the quotes is my own opinion, inside the quotes is from Matt Cutt’s blog.

[indcons]

Thanks for your comments.

“However, I want my health insurance company to do it, not Google.”

Yep...that’s happening. It is slightly more challenging than the usual provider-centric EMR systems because the source for data is claims forms as opposed to the facility or practice. Then, there’s the question of dealing with medical records belonging to the uninsured and other challenges.

However, none of these are unsurmountable and we’ll see payor-based EHR/PHR systems in the market in the not-too-distant future (I know this for a fact).

[Eighth Square]

As I age I have come to the same conclusions. My experience is that we are the most over medicated, over tested society in human history. TV is constantly upping the anti with symptoms of diseases you might possible have and urgently directing you to run to the doctor for possible use of their drug or someone else’s, ‘cos you’re dying bub! It’s a nut house out there! Moms medicating their little kiddies ect., when in most cases all you have to do is learn and understand nutrition and exercise your bod.

[Titan Magroyne]

My Doc still uses manila file folders and lined paper... He refuses to digitize due to the lack of privacy and possible liability. I appreciate his concern, but he is a dying breed.... Noble servant of men.

I suppose HIPPA put a stop to this, but some OB/Gyno offices used to rent out their expectant parents list to telemarketers who specialised in pregnancy and babyhood items. It's stuck with me over the years that at least one woman wrote in to Ann Landers to complain about it. Specifically, she had miscarried a child she and her husband very much wanted, and later got a call from a saleswoman pitching baby products. When she told her that they had no children, the salesbeech told her she was lying, she knew they had a kid because the doctor's office said so.

Not even my doctor/dentist (HMO) has my home phone. Needless to say, neither do any other businesses I patronise. Keeping it off of computer databases is the only way to maintain an unlisted phone.

Now if only my state's county tax collectors organization website had not erroneously listed my number as my county's tax office...

But entrusting one's entire medical record to Google? Holy cow!

[CitizenM]

I Wonder: Will this also include the medical records of a certain William J. Clinton? You know, the former President of the U.S. who has never, ever released his medical records for any eyes to see? Would be a hoot to Google symptoms of chronic, life-long cocaine abuse and have Billy Boy’s medical history pop up!

[cbkaty]

But entrusting one's entire medical record to Google? Holy cow!

REALLY................!

indecon doesn't see the danger of medical records stored by Google. Can't ya just envision all the execs denying responsibility for the what is bound to happen, exposure of the data to the world.

[Titan Magroyne]

Yeah. And like a teenager whose intended prank is received with anger instead of laughter, they'll be like, "Whut? What did I do?" Like we're the ones too stupid to get it [shrug], no biggie.

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

Researchers Find Way to Steal Encrypted Data
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1974919/posts

[traviskicks]

bookmark

[traviskicks]

well said.