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."
How dare big EVIL Pharma collect accurate information that could ensure the safety of drugs and save people's lives!
It's an outrage!
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.
Not just medical insurance companies. But that will come when wearing of these devices are made mandatory, probably an argument along the lines of "well only terrorists *wouldn't* wear them". Then following an accident anywhere (on the road, place of work, whatever) the insurance company will be able to analyse the data about your physical state prior to the incident to find a reason why they won't pay.
Wearing such devices wouldn't ever be mandated, you say? Sure they will, bribe... I mean lobby, enough politicians and it will happen.
People wouldn't willingly concede even more freedoms to wear these things, you say? Yeah... right.
The article optimistically adds, "Down the line, wearables also could help pharmaceutical makers prove to insurance companies that their treatments are effective, thus increasing health profits."
Fixed.
By which you mean "provide enough campaign contributions"?
Throw in a "think of the children" and "becuz national security", and it won't be long. In order to keep us safe, you see.
That it will also be heavily monetized is just a side effect.
But someone somewhere is salivating at the prospect of the entire citizenry being tagged and monitored, and they'll say it's to defend freedom. Give it a a little more time.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Thus reducing health costs [for increased profits].
100? My fitbit cost almost 300...
When you cant win, ad hominem.
10 years ago I would have said you were delusional. 10 years from now it will probably be a reality.
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.
Not just medical insurance companies. But that will come when wearing of these devices are made mandatory, probably an argument along the lines of "well only terrorists *wouldn't* wear them". Then following an accident anywhere (on the road, place of work, whatever) the insurance company will be able to analyse the data about your physical state prior to the incident to find a reason why they won't pay.
Wearing such devices wouldn't ever be mandated, you say? Sure they will, bribe... I mean lobby, enough politicians and it will happen.
People wouldn't willingly concede even more freedoms to wear these things, you say? Yeah... right.
Don't even have to take it that far. Just offer a 'discount' on insurance premiums for those wearing (aka raise the rates of those not wearing).
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
because I "walk" 8 miles a day when I am coding. It detects my typing style as walking.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Not just medical insurance companies. But that will come when wearing of these devices are made mandatory, probably an argument along the lines of "well only terrorists *wouldn't* wear them"
You say that like the edict will come from the right wing, and that may be a popular belief. But the left is the party that voted to mandate health insurance, and people went along with it because, a) they believed the "it's for the good of everyone that everyone have insurance" line; and/or, b) they accepted it because it came from their side. Granted, the established left and right in the United States is basically the softest game of tug-o-war in history; however, it seems to me that the "Fitbit Mandate" will come shrouded as "it's for the good of everyone that everyone have a Fitbit" rather than "The Gestapo says you will wear a Fitbit."
People wouldn't willingly concede even more freedoms to wear these things, you say? Yeah... right.
Sadly/Generally, the average person will follow along with what their chosen Party says they should do.
Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
that their treatments are effective, thus reducing health costs."
Never has something which is shown to be effective reduced costs. It's like being a safe driver yet your car insurance goes up every year.
The only ones who will see the savings are the companies themselves. It will not "trickle down" to us peons.
Remember how forcing people to hand over their money to private companies via Obamneycare was supposed to make health insurance less expensive? How's that working out?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Which one did you get? Does it come with a pair of lips?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.