Your prescription history is their business

“A secretive, for-profit service called ScriptCheck keeps track of all your prescriptions, even those you pay for with cash. Life insurers pay for the data.”

To view the full article, please visit: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-20131022,0,1491023.column#ixzz2miu5cODJ

Prescription drug database bill stalls in Pa. House

To view the full article, please visit: Prescription drug database bill stalls in Pa. House

“A bill that would create a prescription drug database intended to help law enforcement nab doctor-shoppers and pill mills hit a hurdle Wednesday in the state House.”

Why The Experts Are Probably Wrong About The Healthcare.gov Crack-Up

“Many technology experts are blaming the software behind Healthcare.gov for all the problems Americans have encountered while trying to sign up for health insurance in accordance with the Affordable Care Act.”

This interesting article explores what is wrong and what is right about healthcare.gov. To view the full article, please visit Why The Experts Are Probably Wrong About The Healthcare.gov Crack-Up.

PPR Submits Comments to Privacy and Security Tiger Team

On Monday, September 30, the Health IT Policy Committee’s Privacy and Security Tiger Team held a Virtual Hearing on Accounting of Disclosures, which is a listing meant to show patients all disclosures of their personal information that are made by a HIPAA-covered entity. On behalf of PPR, Dr. Peel provided written testimony that details the importance of implementing robust AODs, as well as recommendations for quick implementation using existing health IT and meaningful use requirements.

Read the full comments here.

Patient privacy evangelist, analytics officer spar over data rights

To view the full article, please visit: Patient privacy evangelist, analytics officer spar over data rights

“…At the HIMSS Media/Healthcare IT News Privacy and Security Forum in Boston, patient privacy advocate Deborah Peel, MD, of Patient Privacy Rights, and UPMC Insurance Services Division Chief AnalyticsOfficer Pamela Peele took the stage to debate the highly-contested issue of whether patients should have full consent over how and with whom their personal health information records are shared.”

Key quotes from Dr. Peel:

“Forty to 50 million people a year do one of three things: avoid or delay diagnosis for critical conditions like cancer, depression and sexually transmitted diseases, or they hide information,” said Peel. “There’s the economic impact of having a system that people don’t trust.”

“He found that only a whopping 1 percent of the public would ever agree to unfettered research use of their data. Even with de-identified data, only 19 percent would agree to the use of their data for research without consent,” said Peel. “On the other hand, when people are asked if they want to participate or have their data used with consent, the public is very altruistic, so we get something very different fuller information, more complete information when the public knows what you’re doing with it and they support the project.”

 

HHS Site Aims To Educate About Health Information Exchange

“On Tuesday, HHS launched a website to help health care providers educate their patients on making informed decisions about health information exchange, The Hill‘s “Healthwatch” reports.”

“Deborah Peel — founder and chair of the not-for-profit Patient Privacy Rights — called HHS’ educational efforts flawed.”

She suggested that HHS instead should have:

  • Mentioned patients’ “fundamental right to health information privacy” in model notices for HIPAA compliance released this week; and
  • Informed patients of their right to a complete list of entities who have accessed their personal health information in electronic health records (FierceHealthIT, 9/17).”

For more information, please visit: HHS Site Aims To Educate About Health Information Exchange

Trust must be mutual for patient engagement to work

“A recent study in the Journal of the American Informatics Association reports that nearly one in eight patients has withheld information from their healthcare providers due to security concerns. Moreover, most of the respondents were very concerned about the security of their information when it was being shared electronically or by fax. Just last week, advocacy organization Patient Privacy Rights sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services urging the agency to improve privacy protections of patients’ electronic health records, particularly in the cloud and in HIEs.”

Read more: Trust must be mutual for patient engagement to work – FierceEMR http://www.fierceemr.com/story/trust-must-be-mutual-patient-engagement-work/2013-09-18#ixzz2fRtzIBsV
Subscribe at FierceEMR

Pairing patient privacy with health big data analytics

“Health privacy and security are often mentioned in tandem, but Deborah Peel, Founder and Chair of Patient Privacy Rights and Adrian Gropper, Chief Technology Officer of Patient Privacy Rights, took a different view in a recent Institute for Health Technology Transformation (iHT2) webcast.”

“The presentation, titled “Competing for Patient Trust and Data Privacy in the Age of Big Data” detailed a few of the nuances between patient data privacy and security and why privacy is so significant as healthcare organizations pull together huge data sets for health information exchange (HIE) and accountable care.”

To view the full article, please visit: Pairing patient privacy with health big data analytics

The webcast can be viewed at: Competing for Patient Trust and Data Privacy in the Age of Big Data Webinar

Five More Organizations Join Lawsuit Against NSA Surveillance

To view the full article, please visit: Five More Organizations Join Lawsuit Against NSA Surveillance

“The five entities joining the First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles v. NSA lawsuit before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California are: Acorn Active Media, the Charity and Security Network, the National Lawyers Guild, Patient Privacy Rights and The Shalom Center. They join an already diverse coalition of groups representing interests including gun rights, environmentalism, drug-policy reform, human rights, open-source technology, media reform and religious freedom.”

The FBI’s New Wiretapping Plan Is Great News for Criminals

To view the full article, please visit: The FBI’s New Wiretapping Plan Is Great News for Criminals

US technology is designed for ‘exceptions’ and ‘outliers’, i.e., ‘worst-case’ scenarios like terrorists and unconscious patients.

Bruce Schneier concludes  his May 29th  essay:

“Finally there’s a general principle at work that’s worth explicitly stating. All tools can be used by the good guys and the bad guys. Cars have enormous societal value, even though bank robbers can use them as getaway cars. Cash is no different. Both good guys and bad guys send e-mails, use Skype, and eat at all-night restaurants. But because society consists overwhelmingly of good guys, the good uses of these dual-use technologies greatly outweigh the bad uses. Strong Internet security makes us all safer, even though it helps the bad guys as well. And it makes no sense to harm all of us in an attempt to harm a small subset of us.”

Fear-driven technology harms Democracy and health:

  • Example #1: FBI

Bruce Schneier’s essay (below) tells how US-created security flaws help the wrong people (criminals and terrorists) and harm the rest of us (law-abiding citizens).

  • Giving the government access (via back doors, brute force decryption, etc) to everyone’s data to find terrorists is the ‘worst-case’ scenario used to justify destroying strong data security protections.
  • But law-abiding people, businesses, and government really NEED strong data security protections to function everyday online.
  • Criminals and terrorists can exploit the security flaws created to catch them to steal information and harm governments, individuals, and corporations; but ordinary citizens and businesses can’t build or afford security technology to protect their own data.
  • WORST CONSEQUENCES: people will not trust technology and governments, and cyber-wars can destroy people, governments, and corporations.

 

  • Example #2: US health technology systems

The US eliminated data privacy in health technology systems, helping the wrong people (government and corporations) and harming patients.

  • Government and corporations control the use of the nation’s health data. Medical emergencies are the ‘worst-case’ scenario used to justify this technology: if you are unconscious in an emergency room (a one-in-a-million), you can’t give consent to share your data.
  • But the 299,999, 700 million US patients who are awake expect to control use of personal health data in order to trust doctors and technology.
  • Government and industry control use of the nation’s data for various purposes without the knowledge of the public, there is no ‘chain of custody’ for health data and no data map to track uses. Some hidden uses may be beneficial and some may harm patients.  Patients can’t buy or use privacy technology to protect health data.
  • WORST CONSEQUENCES: 40-50 million people/year avoid or delay treatment, or hide information to protect the privacy of health information, risking their lives and health.  Technology causes tens of millions of people who need treatment to suffer bad health outcomes.

 

In a Democracy, judges should approve spying on suspected criminals or terrorists. In a Democracy patients should be asked for consent to use personal health data. Advance directives or break-the-glass technology can permit access to health data when patients are unconscious.

 

In a Democracy, shouldn’t technology support ‘best-case’ scenarios , i.e., citizens’ freedoms and human and civil rights to privacy and health?