5 ms·
Is her first-hand reporting that patients don't believe in COVID an unsubstantiated rumour?
by StavrosK 6y ago
Is her first-hand reporting that patients don't believe in COVID an unsubstantiated rumour?
- rriepe 6y agoIt's either unsubstantiated or a HIPAA violation
- sonotathrowaway 6y agoTelling you uncomfortable truths isn’t a hipaa violation, as the law was not written to protect your feelings.
- ralusek 6y agoI mean...many uncomfortable truths ARE HIPAA violations. What makes it NOT a HIPAA violation is that it's just general/anonymized anecdata. I can't go up to someone and be like "Alice Rosenstein has cervical cancer, sorry if that's an uncomfortable truth, but the law wasn't written to protect your feelings." That would, in fact, be a HIPAA violation.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- wesleywt 6y agoThere is a difference between saying, Mrs. Jones has a bad yeast infection and there are many yeast infections this time of year. The one is giving patient information the other is discussing the disease.
- ralusek 6y agoYes...that's what I said. I said the thing that makes it not a HIPAA violation is the fact that it's general data.
- pinneycolton 6y agoTechnically, that's only a HIPAA violation if you're a provider or are handling data given to you by a provider.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Retric 6y agoThat’s not how HIPAA works. There is a huge difference between knowing a specific person has a specific disease, and talking about a case without identifying the specific person. A case study is very common and gives a great deal of information about the medical side of what someone has gone through, without identifying them. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_study https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_study
- rriepe 6y agoSo how would she substantiate these claims without committing the violation, again? Assume just for this answer that she's not an institution conducting a case study, but an individual conducting a TV interview. Tell me what evidence she sends to the station that substantiates the story but does not violate HIPAA.
- Retric 6y agoThe same basic things you do to substantiate any story. Verify the details you can such as does this person work at that location, and verify as much as possible with other coworkers.
- coding123 6y agoYeah, if you fully grasped what he was saying it was actually a funny joke. The person substantiates by revealing the identity, and that's the hipaa violation.
- s5300 6y agoHey look, another person who doesn't know what HIPAA actually is/does...
- rriepe 6y agoStop making up groups of people to hate. Stick to the argument or don't comment.
- sonotathrowaway 6y agoThroughout these comments I don’t think I’ve seen you make one good faith argument. You engage in lies (HIPAA violations), shifting the goalposts (well she said it, now she needs to prove it and violate HIPAA so I can be right), and then just shift towards personal attacks once the above fails (you’re attacking me by pointing out I’m not being honest). It’s amazing watching how powerful cognitive dissonance is, and the extent to which people will try to deny simple realities. Fitting, given that it’s under an article about people who’d rather die after they failed to realize their felling didn’t alter reality.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- twunde 6y agoWhy is this not a HIPAA violation? HIPAA is a US law that's focused on protecting the privacy of a person's medical history. In SQL terms you can't JOIN a person's identity with their medical history (unless explicitly authorized). However aggregated data is allowed, as long as it can't be easily reverse-engineered.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- sonotathrowaway 6y agoYou acknowledge that HIPAA doesn’t allow identifying specific patients. Are you under the impression that she named a identified a specific person in that article?
- twunde 6y agoSorry, I should have edited. This is why the article is NOT a HIPAA violation. Damn you slack distractions
- coding123 6y agoSorry rriepe, people didn't get your joke.
- rriepe 6y agoI'll try phrasing it better next time, perhaps using OR or ||...