The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Google and Microsoft have gotten together and decided how they’re going to handle your health records. That’s nice of them. Click here for their proposed privacy framework.
It’s pretty clear that there’s a lot of upside from having peoples’ health records online — less redundancy, fewer missing tests, no more faxing records from one doctor to another. But privacy is a big concern; a recent article in the NEJM pointed out that tech shops such as Google and Microsoft don’t have to abide by HIPAA, the federal law that covers patient privacy.
The California Legislature seems to be tentatively endorsing a bill that would allow pharmacies to partner with drug companies to send out letters reminding patients to refill their prescriptions.
The bills sponsor seems to be getting all kinds of flack for allegedly being indebted to the pharmaceutical industry.
Senate Bill 1096 by Sen. Ron Calderon, D-Montebello, is sponsored by a medical information company facing an invasion of privacy class-action suit that alleges some practices the legislation would make legal.
…
Calderon, who has received more than $21,000 in campaign contributions from pharmaceutical companies and pharmacy chains, said his bill does not allow “marketing or sales pitches.”
Whatever the case may be, there doesn’t seem to be much effort employed to avoid having this look “shady”.
The Times & Transcript reports that New Brunswick Ombudsman Bernard Richard has spoken up regarding the unfortunate and serious loss of patient health records during transit to British Columbia several months ago.
Murphy said yesterday that lessons have been learned, and announced that new privacy legislation will be delayed until the fall in order to offer New Brunswickers the chance to respond to a discussion paper on the subject.
The legislation is being developed in part to help protect New Brunswickers’ personal information as Murphy moves ahead with the creation of an electronic health record system that would track the medical history of every New Brunswicker.
There’s lots of spirited debate at CBC.ca on an article detailing the discussion surrounding Canadian’s digital health records being managed and stored in the U.S.
Some day soon, Canadians will have access to free online tools for managing their health information. But there are concerns that plans to store the information on servers south of the border could mean unwittingly sharing it with the American government.
This is a follow up to an earlier post I made called New Hampshire Considering Getting Tough(er) On Privacy.
The bill didn’t pass and it has some people a little upset. For a pro-bill critique of the situation head on over to this blog. Below is an excerpt that discusses why it was rejected. For counter points, check out the preceding link.
In one of the more bizarre statements Kathleen Bizarro (I’m not making that name up), EVP of the NH Hospital Association stated the bill would “essentially put a halt to the development of electronic medical records.†The medical establishment went on to state that the bill was too onerous, would restrict a physicians ability to provide good care, and that it would exceed existing federal laws (HIPAA).
12:58 pm | March 14, 2008
An interesting article from the Washington Post is available here titled “New Ways to Manage Health Data“. It’s a great introduction to the foundation of the debate over putting Personal Health Records (PHRs) online. There’s been a lot of controvery lately after Google announced it would be entering the race to put our health records online.
Lately, Internet giants Microsoft and Google have upped the ante, developing sites that combine PHRs with search engines and other services. … The new capabilities raise the value of PHRs — as well as the risk from breaches of privacy. And as the records sites grow in number and sophistication, privacy advocates are stepping up their warnings, especially about PHRs offered by health insurers.
There are serious issues of security and how these PHR’s would be controlled and transferred between providers and repositories that warrant further debate.
