Slashdot Mirror
Feds Plan For 35 Agencies To Collect, Share, Use Health Records of Americans
cold fjord writes: The Weekly Standard reports, "This week, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced the release of the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan 2015-2020, which details the efforts of some 35 departments and agencies of the federal government and their roles in the plan to 'advance the collection, sharing, and use of electronic health information to improve health care, individual and community health, and research.' ... Now that HHS has publicly released the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan, the agency is seeking the input from the public before implementation. The plan is subject to two-month period of public comment before finalization. The comment period runs through February 6, 2015." Among the many agencies that will be sharing records besides Health and Human Services are: Department of Agriculture, Department of Defense, Department of Education, Department of Justice and Bureau of Prison, Department of Labor, Federal Communications Commission, Federal Trade Commission, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Office of Personnel Management, National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Dice needs to share why Timothy is still employed and why Bennett Haselton uses the site as his blog. Transparency!
I wonder if there is any way to opt OUT of this. I don't see that the Federal govt needs to know or store or handle my personal medical information.
I'm happy to take my chances without them handling this, I've done quite well without it all these many years of my life so far.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Well, you guys wanted federal health care.
Please don't act all surprised when this information is used for all sorts of other purposes.
-Styopa
Privacy and and security seem to be an afterthought, at best, in these plans and associated documents. Given the fact that attacks on health care data are already growing at an alarming rate (as predicted by many analysts) and that the health care industry is 10-20 years behind financial services when it comes to security and fraud prevention, this plan seems premature. At the very least, it's stated goals need to place privacy and security at the forefront, for until that gap is closed, any effort to expand the footprint of such sensitive information is, to say the least, misguided.
Of course, there's no guarantee the US hasn't hacked that country's computers, telecommunications, or enacted a data sharing agreement with that government.
Seriously, name me a single country which provably hasn't been hacked by the US, or directly share data with the US, and which would be your bastion of privacy.
I have my doubts such a place exists.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
On the plus side, you'll probably live longer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Actually, the problem is that we fall for the "It's for the starving children" political rhetoric and have VERY short memories. What happens in reality is what Jonathan Gruber (sp) said happened with the ACA, it's how you package it. It's all about the marketing and the sound bites and NOT about the truth. In short, lie, cheat and steal what you want and politics has turned into a PR propaganda campaign where the truth comes in second to the cause. "The ends justify the means."
However, all is not lost. Despite the problems of politics, the voters still do respond to such tactics eventually. Every Senator that got elected for their first time in 2008 and voted for the ACA just lost their re-election bid. Many others who voted for the ACA are also gone. Once the real effects of the ACA started to hit home and the propaganda proven untrue, the voters responded.
Short term, the tactic works, but in the long run, I still have faith in the voters... At least the slice of voters in the middle who actually decide things for us...
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
I'm curious how data sharing works in those countries with nationalized health systems. I'd wager there's at least as much information sharing there as anywhere else.
Why have HIPAA, when tens of thousands of federal employees will have access to our personal information?
This is what you wanted, Democrats.*
* based on Congressional Record of ACA voting
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Before we cower in fear because ZOMG EVERYONE KNOWS EVERYTHING ABOUT ME....lets consider some things:
-there has been a push for a long time to move medical records to electronic format. we've been promised cost reductions as a result, as well has better/quicker care
-most health records still paper instead of electronic. the move to electronic records has largely been a failure; one reason is the resulting cost reductions that have been promised have been slow to materialize, if theyve materialized at all.
-those that are, are not in some large nationwide or accessible database
-under federal law personal health information is private and cannot be released to outside parties without consent
-under federal law any information that is released must be anonymized; ie, no SSN or names or other personally identifiable information
-google facebook and other data miners probably already know more about your current health needs than these records would tell someone, and they already associate it with you (ie, their data isnt anonymous)
So we're not talking about the FBI or NSA using this to find out you have irritable bowel syndrome.
(chances are they already know from other sources like Facebook anyway...*tin foil hat*).
and they likely wouldnt care anyway (life is not a hollywood movie).
No, its not readily apparent why the Dept of Ag might need health data.
But health researchers absolutely. And they get anonymized health data already.
But if we considered something like antibiotic resistance and hte theory that overapplication to livestock is a factor, I could see a scenario where health researchers partner with Dept of Ag to study the effects of antibiotic usage on livestock.
In fact the anonymous nature of this data is a big factor in the outrage over the House bills just a week or two ago that purported to "ban secret science" by requiring full disclouse over everything, and banning agencies from making decisions based on "secret science or data". This would have the efect of banning hte CDC or other health agencies from making decisions based on research using this anonymous data....data that is anonymous because of privacy laws. Effectively hamstringing the agencies compeltely.
All in all, teh cowering in fear and conspiracy reactions to this are just FUD.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
The ironic thing about Grubergate is that he's been proven right. The Republicans have used one recorded remark by a mid-level bureaucrat to override all fact-based arguments about the ACA for the past month. Yes, people really are stupid. Give them something to be angry about, and they'll vote against their own interests.
Have you read my blog lately?
So what information can't you get that you need?
You stole my question.
What information can't you get that you need Mr. Government?
In San Francisco, a police officer can already pull the list of prescribed medications of any girl in California he's interested in dating (without any audit trail or oversight). Does every cop really "need" that kind of access at his fingertips for the war on drugs?
It would be nice if the information also freely flowed the other way. Can you let us know what prescribed medication police officers take? Which of them take meds for being crazy, or take meds for STDs, the public has the right to know about that. In fact, an STD test should also be required of a police officer anytime that police officer has an open cut, or provokes an open cut in someone else.
And what about the medication lists of district attorneys and sitting judges? It would be nice to know about their meds as well. The same goes for the medication of their wives or girlfriends. After all, if a cop/DA can get the medication information, and by inference the medical information, of myself and/or my significant other on a whim. I should also have the right to do the same to him.
If you like your insurance you can keep your insurance. ...
If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.
If you like your privacy you can keep your privacy.
If you like your freedom
Thank You, Jonathan Gruber
Obamistas believe they had to lie to pass Obamacare because Americans are stupid.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell