Slashdot Mirror


Big Pharma Hands Out Fitbits To Collect Better Personal Data

An anonymous reader writes: Since the dawn of modern medicine, there have really only been two ways to know what a medical patient is doing: A) keep them around and monitor them, or B) ask them. The first is often impractical, and the second is fraught with misreporting. However, we're now in the age of data collection, and medical data is no exception. Pharmaceutical companies are gleefully passing out Fitbits and other wearables so they can more accurately test the drugs they make. Early trials have already found such devices to be better than human memory at reporting things like how much a patient walks. Other organizations are using movement data to algorithmically decide whether a patient needs a higher level of treatment. The article optimistically adds, "Down the line, wearables also could help pharmaceutical makers prove to insurance companies that their treatments are effective, thus reducing health costs."

6 of 70 comments (clear)

  1. My kingdom for a hacker. by nimbius · · Score: 4, Interesting

    biometric technology originally fascinated and excited me. After spending 2 months hacking the fitbit flex and fitbit one im all but broken. the system uses asymmetric cryptography to ensure you never have independent access to the data it collects. the transmission protocol it uses is simple, ANT in most cases, but the private key to decrypt my footsteps and data lies solely on their servers. One would think that without independent evaluation of the data its gleaning, most major pharmaceuticals and insurance companies would be wary but that doesnt appear to be the case. like breathalizers and OBD/ECM monitors from car insurance companies, no one seems interested in their accuracy.

    my last 3 jobs have offered these fitbits. the first one, an option, subsidized the device. The next two jobs basically ordered it for me and stated that if i wanted a discount on my health insurance, id better strap in. the privacy policy for fitbit outright states theyre going to sell your data to other companies, like it or not. So why do people put up with this? does anyone know of an open-source and accurate alternative for the fitbit?

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:My kingdom for a hacker. by Voyager529 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Same here! I've wanted a Fitbit-style fitness tracker as well, but one that didn't require an account or cloud synchronization. I see no reason at all for a fitness tracker to outright require that data be uploaded to someone else's hard drive; all of the functions and accounting it performs can be adequately handled on my phone directly. However, no one seems to be marketing to this particular niche. If you find one, or if the Fitbit can be modded to exist in some form of 'local only' mode, I'm definitely in.

    2. Re:My kingdom for a hacker. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Well, for starters, uploading it to their server means if you get new phone you don't lose all your old data. And encrypting it for transmission just makes good sense when you're sending personal data. If they didn't, this story would be about how 'insecure' and 'hackable' fitbit is. Because, you see, with you people, you just can't win.

  2. Re:How DARE they! by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's one thing to use them on a voluntary basis in order to test the efficacy of a new drug. In such a case, it makes perfect sense.

    However, it's another thing entirely for a health insurance company to require their use (or face a massive premium hike, etc).

    Then again, on a slight tangent, I do find it interesting that more and more drugs are coming out these days which pretty much require the drug's use for, quite literally, the rest of your life (usually heart medications).

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  3. Re:How DARE they! by ComputerGeek01 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Then again, on a slight tangent, I do find it interesting that more and more drugs are coming out these days which pretty much require the drug's use for, quite literally, the rest of your life (usually heart medications).

    I love a conspiracy theory as much as the next geek, but this is not tin foil hat material. Things that are persistent for the rest of your life, such as pulmonary issues, are being targeted because the promise of repeat business is already there. They aren't trying to keep people sick because there is no need to; why risk everything and hope everyone else plays along when there are genuine gold mines sitting right there?

    What truly is disgusting is how ineffective they are. Yet they still get to market themselves as the miracle curest that they aren't.

  4. Re:Gasp! by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

    10 years ago I would have called someone saying that delusional too.

    But the last 10 years have taught me that almost nothing is too far fetched to believe. Years ago the nerds all went "yeah, right, they can't actually do that you know".

    Post-Snowden, however, lots of people are going "holy crap, we're not paranoid enough ".

    And there's so many people saying "well, if it's to protect the children or stop the terrorists it must be OK". Sadly, we seem to be racing towards a surveillance society, and people seem to not be outraged by it.

    I'm no longer kidding when I say such things. And that is scary, because it means being tinfoil-hat-crazy is now a normal state, and founded in reality.

    But always remember: All of this data collected by these things is pretty much under secret US jurisdiction, just like the stuff from Microsoft is. So, yes, Big Brother really is watching.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.