Google Health Opens To the Public

Several readers noted that the limited pilot test of Google Health has ended, and Google is now offering the service to the public at large. Google Health allows patients to enter health information, such as conditions and prescriptions, find related medical information, and share information with their health care providers (at the patient's request). Information may be entered manually or imported from partnered health care providers. The service is offered free of charge, and Google won't be including advertising. The WSJ and the NYTimes provide details about Google's numerous health partners.

Comments

Privacy

[whoever57]

I for one won't be using it while their terms of service explicitly states that HIPAA doesn't apply to Google.

Re:Privacy

[morgan_greywolf]

Okay, here is the government telling you that HIPAA doesn't apply to Google. Google isn't a health care provider, nor is it a health care insurance plan, nor is it a health care clearinghouse, by the legal definitions of those terms (check the law if you like), so, no, HIPAA most certainly does not apply to Google or any other company or entity providing a similar service.

Re:Privacy

[ChristopherEddie]

In times like these, I would trust Google over the government ANY DAY! I'd rather have a creative, for-profit company actually try to make a difference than have the government dick around with tax dollars that companies like Google will end up generating anyway.

google information horde

[pha7boy]

so, google will have your surfing profile, your financial information, tons of images of you, your house, your friends, your networks, and how will add to it your health information. You know, Big Brother can be a government, but it can also be a corporation. Even one that claims not to do any evil.

Yes, it has advertising, through "affiliates".

[Animats]

Yes, Google Health supports advertising. Spamming, even. Read the developer guidelines. Google just doesn't run the ads themselves. That's outsourced to "affiliates".

There are some rules for affiliates, like "one spam per week per user" and "no popups or popunders". Other than that, consumers are fair game. In particular, affiliates are not prohibited from using Google health data to target ads, as long as they "disclose" that somewhere in their "privacy policy". The policy says "Only use Google Health user data for the purposes disclosed in your privacy policy, and obtain users' opt-in consent if personally identifiable health data will be used for ad targeting." So a bit of fine print, and the affiliate 0wns your health history.

It's a typical slimeball tactic - pretend to be the good guy, encourage "affiliates" to do the bad stuff.

Re:Yes, it has advertising, through "affiliates".

[dmr001]

Oy vey, you folks need to take a step back. The above guidelines refer to other service providers that users can opt in to and share their history with. Google is simply limiting their ability to annoy you, should you choose to opt in.

And, Google isn't protecting your information via HIPAA because it can't - it's not a "covered entity" under the definition outlined in the law. (That is, they aren't a health provider, billing clearinghouse, or health plan.) Instead, they provide the Google Health Privacy Policy, which seems pretty reasonable. Like HIPAA, it allows them to disclose information when it seems like the government (US, in this case, as that's where the service is limited to) compels it. Before you get hot and bothered, HIPAA allows this too - it's how we tell get to CPS about abused children, for example.

I'm not new here, but I'm used to Slashdot readers being somewhat more informed before having a fit. As a covered entity myself (I'm a physician), I look forward to the day when the patients who come in saying they doubled the pink pills but lost the yellow ones they took for that surgery to remove that thigamajig have a hope of a secure information repository to clarify their history, and potentially save their bacon.

missing drug side effects

[jonpublic]

I am dealing with a rare side effect from a fluoroquinolone, (think cipro, levaquin) called peripheral neuropathy. I plugged the antibiotic into google health and the side effect was not listed on the package insert. While its good to have drug interactions listed, lots of people have side effects from drugs and they need to be explicitly spelled out, not hiding in a sub menu.

I know for a fact that there is explicit warnings on the packages about this particular reaction and I'm livid it isn't warning about it on the package insert in google. Especially since it can be permanent.

I've racked up a couple thousand dollars in medical bills already from this side effect, and it was a pain to get doctors to admit it happened until I went to a major university hospital. At that hospital they diagnosed me right away and basically said I'd have to wait it out.

If you are curious, basically I couldn't walk for over a week, terrible joint pain for months along with numbness in my hands, face, and body. Its a known side effect with this class. Rare, but known.

"How does Google make money off Google Health?"

[kiscica]

6. If it's free, how does Google make money off Google Health?
Much like other Google products we offer, Google Health is free to anyone who uses it. There are no ads in Google Health. Our primary focus is providing a good user experience and meeting our users' needs.

I've heard enough. I don't know what their long-term plan for monetizing Google Health is, and I don't really care now. I don't trust Google enough to consider even for a second entrusting my health care information to them (and I say this as someone who has thought very highly of the company since the beginning). And their weasly answer to the obvious question above, I think, justifies my mistrust.

Every for-profit company's primary focus is - making a profit. There's nothing whatsoever wrong with this, and the ideal situation arises when "providing a good user experience and meeting [...] users' needs" is aligned with the profit motive.

So why they can't be honest about their motivations in undertaking an expensive, large-scale project like this -- whatever those motivations are -- instead of trying to make us believe that they're doing it "out of the goodness of their hearts?" All their mealy-mouthedness accomplishes is to raise the suspicion that they've got something nasty up their sleeves. And that ensures that many users, including me, will never entrust their most private of private data to Google.

Re:"How does Google make money off Google Health?"

[SCHecklerX]

And you trust your health insurance companies? Their sole purpose is to make profit. We'd be much much better off without them, paying doctors and hospitals directly.

You misunderstand HIPPA

[dreamchaser]

Your medical provider is covered by HIPPA and CANNOT release your records to a third party without your consent. When you go to a new doctor they generally make you sign something saying they can share it with your insurance company, who also cannot share it with Google without your consent.

The way Google Health works is you give them your data and they store it.

Re:Wow

[kestasjk]

I had a cold, had some herbal medicine, a few days later my cold was gone. Explain that!

Why not?

[RealityThreek]

Why isn't Google a health care clearinghouse?

Health care clearinghouses include billing services, repricing companies, community health management information systems, and value-added networks and switches if these entities perform clearinghouse functions.

I'm certainly no expert but I do speak english. Is Google not a "community health management information system"?