Story Comments
Posted by: Beau7890 11 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
100%
Beau789011 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I wonder what rationale has been given for maintaining an enormous electronic database of health records with no provision to opt out. It seems to me that this can help only private insurers. And why would it be part of the stimulus bill? Doesn't Congress understand that we're tired of having unrelated measures buried in emergency legislation, as done with the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act? Or does simply not care?
Reply
I also wonder if this is part of Obama's original stimulus plan, or if it has been added somewhere along the legislative process by a member of Congress.-
-
-
-
50%
jk548911 months ago
-
100%
Beau789011 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I wouldn't say "most" of the stimulus plan has nothing to do with the crisis, though there's more that doesn't in the form of tax cuts (which we've already seen does not stimulate job creation) than I'd like.
Reply
Propeller member flyonthewalzz (who always does excellent research) has provided this link on another thread, as to how the spending proposed breaks down:
http://pndblog.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0099631d0883301...
At first glance, it may seem like most of the spending doesn't create jobs, but when you look at all the little wedges in the bottom right quadrant of the pie chart, those would all create new industries with new jobs...and almost everything else (except the tax cuts) in the chart could stop layoffs in existing industries and even allow money to be spent on new positions in those industries. (Though it's not exactly clear from the chart if this money would be spent that way.)
-
-
-
-
100%
GehlLady11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Beau,
Reply
This isn't new, he is just using the stimulus plan to make it happen. He stated many times during his campaign this would be a method of 'reducing health care costs'. As more and more of the 'stimulus plan' comes to light, think back to his campaign......some of the glossed over, more controversial proposals he made are being pushed through in this misnamed stimulus plan under the same tactics used by the Bush administration. Fear, the most effective weapon GWB had, is not only a republican attribute.-
100%
Tangent00111 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't think making medical records electronic is something to be afraid of. It does not circumvent HIPAA protections. You would still have same control over what is released and to whom.
Reply
It DOES realize greater efficiencies and safeguards. For example, if you are in the emergency room, there will be instantaneous access to your medical history, including current medications, recent injuries or illnesses, allergies, and the results of recent diagnostic lab tests, MRIs, x-rays etc. Some proposed systems will even notify your PCP of your situation and allow for video conferencing.
I think of my kids if I was killed or rendered unconscious in an accident with them in the car. Nobody would be immediately available to let the doctors know their medical histories. Older people, the mentally disabled, and, of course, the unconscious, are seldom able to accurately report on their histories as well.
Is it possible for someone to 'hack' into such a system? Sure. Is it likely anyone would want to? Probably not.
Bottom line, If someone is going to be treating me or my kids, I want them to have as much current information as possible. I may know that a recent blood test showed nothing alarming, but I certainly couldn't give them the actual numbers.-
100%
moxxxxxxxxxx11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Tangent,
Reply
You bought into the main scheme to sell the idea to the general public. When you make something a life or death issue who wouldn't support it? Fear is a great tactic. You have less control over your records than you believe. Have you ever read the medical releases you sign? It's one thing for healthcare professionals to have your medical information, but do your employers, schools, homeowners and car insurance corps., banks and every institution involved in your life need your medical information? And of these institutions are the people who work for them called to follow the same code of ethics and confidentiality that health professionals must follow? No. Once electronic records is up and running every institution you do business with will demand you sign a release otherwise they won't do business with you. It's called Risk Management. And your health record will be used to determine if you are a risk. All they have to do is make you sign a medical release.
You need to work in the health field. Few people die because the hospital didn't have health information. Emergency doctors and nurses are trained to save lives. They do it everyday.
-
-
-
100%
amazed11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The rationale is improved health care because your records are more easily available to consulting doctors, easier to access your records and history in the case of an accident or you are otherwise unable to provide it yourself.
Reply
If you squint and don't think too much, it sounds like a lovely idea. If you actually think about it, it could very well be one step closer to the totalitarian nanny government that only paranoids believe is on either side's (democrat or republican) agenda.-
100%
Tangent00111 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I imagine the same thing was said about electronic banking. I'm not afraid of technology, and I think we have the awareness not to let the unscrupulous lead us around by the nose.
Reply
How many deaths (and malpractice suits) are the result of a care provider simply lacking that one piece of critical information?-
100%
Beau789011 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm not sure whether my response to you posted, so I'm trying again...sorry if it appears twice.
Reply
If it's not simply meant to be a favor to private insurers, then what's the harm in allowing those who are worried about their records getting into the wrong hands to opt out?-
100%
Tangent00111 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Because it would save emergency room/hospital costs across the board. As I said, private insurers ALREADY have access to the medical records of those they provide insurance for. They also have access to pooled data from third-party aggregators (prescription purchases and such). This pooled data is available to any insurer who wants to pay for it.
Reply
Don't get me wrong, I think it would be an appropriate option to be 'unlisted' in a medical database, but I also think having a surcharge for being unlisted is appropriate as well. Further, I don't think electronic access to medical records is a 'favor to private insurers', since the companies will not have any additional access than they have currently.-
100%
Beau789011 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Right, private insurers have access to the medical records of those for whom they provide coverage. And I think that's acceptable--insurers are paying for their claimants' healthcare. And yes, they also have access to some records from aggregators, which I consider unacceptable. (How is pooling and selling that data legal, by the way?)
Reply
But do insurers now have access to the records of all employees of a business for whom they're deciding how to price a new group plan?
I understand the benefits you're speaking of to those who allow their information to be accessible electronically. But I've always had a problem with the nearly invisible collection and sales by third parties of huge amounts of what I consider to be private information. In this case (and many others), I think considerations of privacy should take precedence.
I'm also an advocate of a single-payer health plan administered by the government...and I know this would require such a database of medical records. But in this case, your personal data would not be used for profit.
-
-
-
Neutral
moxxxxxxxxxx11 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
and now having your identity stolen is a major issue thanks to electronic banking. It didn't take long for the criminal mind to figure out how to scam the system and steal innocent people's identity. You think electronic medical records ar safe???
Reply
-
-
-
loading ...
People Who Liked This Comment (10)
Ciera-Marie
berkeley
moxxxxxxxxxx
Klarissa
amazed
Varadinum
Will1313
lvrofwolves
DenCuddy
ProgressivePeople Who Didn't Like This Comment (0)
No one voted this comment negatively.
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.