2 ms·

HIPAA was signed into law in 1996. The importance of privacy of medical information goes all the way back to the Hippocratic oath, so no, it IS physicians and

HIPAA was signed into law in 1996. The importance of privacy of medical information goes all the way back to the Hippocratic oath, so no, it IS physicians and patients themselves driving concerns about privacy. You really don't know what you're talking about.

bawana 11y ago
I guess I got confused about the details of all the superfluous legislation that our Congress is passing under the pressure from lobbyists... Before the internet, we had concerns about privacy. Records were locked away. But a physician could get records at the hospital to care for the patients (who, by the way, stayed in the hospital until they were well - none of this 'profit seeking' length of stay limit). Release of records to the OUTSIDE required a letter from the patient or a court of law. Now that electronic medical records have supplanted the old system, we are all worried about privacy because the new tech. Can you honestly say that electronic medical records have turned out to be a good thing for patients? I offer patients a USB stick with all their data for $10. And they would not have to type a thing- I already do all of the data entry as part of my encounter with them. 9 out of ten patients choose not to buy it. ( A telling fact is that if I offer it for free, they say they would take it) A simple usb stick with all your files and meds would save so much hassle. Security? Zip up the data with a password, use true crypt, there are so many options for protection. But the main advantage is that the data will only be on the stick and not on the net. So who REALLY benefits by having info about YOUR body on the cloud? You'd think people would keep a record on their smartphones-there are so many apps for this. But instead, when I visit patients in the hospital, they are playing temple run or candy crush. Privacy is not really the issue. It is a straw man for hiding other agendas

bawana 11y ago

I guess I got confused about the details of all the superfluous legislation that our Congress is passing under the pressure from lobbyists... Before the internet, we had concerns about privacy. Records were locked away. But a physician could get records at the hospital to care for the patients (who, by the way, stayed in the hospital until they were well - none of this 'profit seeking' length of stay limit). Release of records to the OUTSIDE required a letter from the patient or a court of law. Now that electronic medical records have supplanted the old system, we are all worried about privacy because the new tech. Can you honestly say that electronic medical records have turned out to be a good thing for patients? I offer patients a USB stick with all their data for $10. And they would not have to type a thing- I already do all of the data entry as part of my encounter with them. 9 out of ten patients choose not to buy it. ( A telling fact is that if I offer it for free, they say they would take it) A simple usb stick with all your files and meds would save so much hassle. Security? Zip up the data with a password, use true crypt, there are so many options for protection. But the main advantage is that the data will only be on the stick and not on the net. So who REALLY benefits by having info about YOUR body on the cloud? You'd think people would keep a record on their smartphones-there are so many apps for this. But instead, when I visit patients in the hospital, they are playing temple run or candy crush. Privacy is not really the issue. It is a straw man for hiding other agendas