Comments on: What If Google Stored All Our Medical Records?

By: M&C Saatchi Mobile

M&C Saatchi Mobile — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:54:30 +0000

interesting idea!

By: Search Week in Review for Oct. 23 2010 | #KiiPass

Search Week in Review for Oct. 23 2010 | #KiiPass — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 01:39:22 +0000

[...] What If Google Stored All Our Medical Records? – Monday Note [...]

By: Mobile Media

Mobile Media — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 13:25:05 +0000

I have heard that many people who control this electronic data are thinking about using a cloud data storage system, which in view is crazy cloud servers store whey to much data and will defiantly become targets for hackers.

By: Rodrick Deross

Rodrick Deross — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 00:55:52 +0000

I’ve been checking your website for a minute now, seems like everyday I learn something new Thanks

By: Jeff

Jeff — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 03:56:11 +0000

I am a global warming denier and recently the CEO of Google said that I may be a criminal for holding such beliefs. Do you think for one second that I am going to turn over my records to him?

By: The challenge of digital medical records « Perfect Search Blog

The challenge of digital medical records « Perfect Search Blog — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:07:02 +0000

[...] standardizing, securing, retrieving and sharing patient data. Jean-Louis Gassée, thinks its a job for Google. Surely there are other [...]

By: Database of NHS records to be developed in England | Vigorous Times

Database of NHS records to be developed in England | Vigorous Times — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 12:57:08 +0000

[...] has been the suggestion that outsourcing the development of medical records systems to companies such as Google could make [...]

By: Sheetal Dube

Sheetal Dube — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:04:21 +0000

I recently completed qualitative research on Personal Health Records and Brian’s comment resonated with me. My research found that Google Health is not meeting the needs of the people who really needs PHRs. It is not easy to customize based on the health needs of people and data privacy concerns are not been addressed upfront. Both these reasons are leading to a low utilization and ineffectiveness of Google as a PHR. So unless Google really starts listening to the needs of the PHR consumers and redesigning Google Health this may not be a good idea. If you are interested to learn more about the research follow this link http://tiny.cc/g3xo6

By: Doctor Google, Emergency : Beyond Search

Doctor Google, Emergency : Beyond Search — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 05:13:32 +0000

[...] “What If Google Stored All Our Medical Records?” caught my attention. The article runs down some of the problems with the brave new world of digital instances of medical information. If you care about health data and have an interest in Google, you may find the write up suggesting that the Google may not be the ideal place to park the data. The article then references Facebook. Now that’s a place to store medical information. [...]

By: What If Google Stored All Our Medical Records? (Jean-Louis Gassée/Monday Note) | The Facebook Phone Project

Tue, 19 Oct 2010 08:20:21 +0000

[...] Gassée / Monday Note:What If Google Stored All Our Medical Records? — Regard the horrified looks on the faces of the attendees at a California [...]

By: Brian S Hall

Brian S Hall — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 04:29:36 +0000

Thanks for this post. Keep fighting the good fight!
Ironically, but a few hours before reading this I visited Google Health, which I do about every six months to review and update any tests, drugs, weight and other health info. Problem is, the site/service is still too hard to use. Maybe Google understands this. When finished, they asked me to complete a survey on the usability and benefits of the service. Hopefully they will make it better, get more users and achieve what you seek, with willing participants.

By: SearchCap: The Day In Search, October 18, 2010

SearchCap: The Day In Search, October 18, 2010 — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 20:31:39 +0000

[...] What If Google Stored All Our Medical Records?, Monday Note [...]

By: Robert Gentel

Robert Gentel — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:58:31 +0000

Comparing trusting Google to trusting a government is risible. The government has a mandate from the people, the people have a vote and a say and can fight for their representation.

Google is just a private money-making institution, with no such mandate and simply does not answer to any of us. They may be perfectly trustworthy now but the bottom line is that they are under no obligation to continue. These are the important details when comparing trust, what on earth you base your facile dismissal of the concerns that Google is too powerful on is anyone’s guess but the very nature of what Google is and what a government is seems to have eluded you.

By: Michael Scharf

Michael Scharf — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:51:29 +0000

Agree with your post, I’ve expanded upon your thoughts at my blog, http://bit.ly/9apwvp

By: offbeatmammal

offbeatmammal — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 16:24:47 +0000

While I love the idea of a central electronic repository that can help me make informed decisions and can be used to drive the cost of healtcare down, I don’t think just giving the job to Google is the answer.
Without the competition of something like (the excellent) Microsoft HealthVault we’re in a one-horse race to monopoly and ethics won’t even get out of the starting gate.

Today I use 23andMe to try and get some insight into what my body might do, HealthVault to track my physical and day to day data – eg http://bit.ly/WalkMe – and my healthcare provider shares billing records so I can at least see what the dentist is charging me (but it’s all coded in such a way that I can’t really make sense of it)

We need to drive this both through consumers – apps like CardioTrainer and RunKeeper, as well as more integrated platforms such as http://bit.ly/GymBuddy – and health care providers by making it beneficial to them… as the new Healthcare provisions come into play consumers are going to start shopping around for better value and providers and HMOs who get out ahead of this are going to be in a much better position to offer better service

By: Gary Bury

Gary Bury — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 15:31:33 +0000

In all honesty I think we get too wrapped up in data protection issues and this is getting in the way of progress, which in this case is improved healthcare. Laws and regulations are there to protect the public but do the public at large really give two hoots about data security and privacy? After all, every day millions and millions of people put the minutest details of their lives on Facebook for everyone to see. So yeah, let Google do it, give the patient a record like facebook and let the patient decide whether to share it or not with medical staff.

By: Rurik Bradbury

Rurik Bradbury — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:36:53 +0000

Absolutely agree. Washington is too infected by big money to allow any disruptive change to the status quo. And given the current incentives structure, we can look forward to continued use of a fax machine and all the rest of the current Kafka-inspired processes for dealing with insurance providers — you are quite right that it is a systemic ‘Prozess’ of cost-cutting by deterring claims.

One thought, though. We are entering a period where consumers are coming to terms with their personal info becoming datapoints for advertisers. Revolutions always take two attempts (the first jolts the people into recognition of the new situation, and makes possible the second), just as in Rome, France, Russia. Google was the first revolution in personal data/privacy. Facebook is the second. So now that people are coming to terms with leasing their personal data to subsidize their free experiences, Google Health becomes more viable as a grass roots phenomenon.

Google could subsidize consumers with $$$ or $$$ equivalent services to come on board, in exchange for AdSense in the right column (targeted medical ads are quite lucrative). For example: a free fax-to-PDF number for each Google Health user would be a real cost to Google, but a step away from the ‘fax it each time’ current process, replacing that with a kind of ‘Dropbox for health’ — so each consumer always has all her docs available, even if it is a dumb PDF instead of a structured database.

Clearly the government is so dysfunctional that we can’t expect tech transformation from there. But on the bright side, creating free, ad-supported services that route around useless entrenched systems is one of the things the Valley does best.

By: Nick Dawson

Nick Dawson — Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:30:45 +0000

Good post – thanks for sharing!
The essential problem is one of data exchange and interoperability. There is no common, secure format for exchanging clinical data. The CCR specs exist but are not highly adopted and even when they are, they are often not to the complete spec…which is basically healthcare nerd speak for “there’s no way for these systems to talk”…. which is important if you want to say get claims data from an insurance provider to marry up with clinical data from your doctor. Having a secure interchange also helps alleviate some of the concerns about google having everything -If data was exchangeable in a common format, you’d just pull it out, load it into another PHR and delete your account.