Quote Of The Year

Quote Of The Year - Paul Shetler - "Its not Your Health Record it's a Government Record Of Your Health Information"

Sunday, January 06, 2019

AusHealthIT Poll Number 456 – Results – 6th January, 2019.

Here are the results of the poll.

Do You Trust The Government To Use Personal Health Information They Hold On You (MBS, PBS Data etc.) Responsibly, Respectfully, Ethically And Securely?

Yes 9% (10)

No 91% (101)

I Have No Idea 0% (0)

Total votes: 111

What an amazing poll. A very large majority do not trust the government to do the right thing with their private health information.

Any insights on the poll welcome as a comment, as usual.

A really, great turnout of votes for the time of the year!

It must have been a very, very easy question as only 0/111 readers were not sure what the appropriate answer was.

Again, many, many thanks to all those that voted!

David.

21 comments:

john scott said...

David, in regard to latest poll, I think another outcome is possible.

The strategic challenge is a ‘NEW IDEA’ to replace the now ‘OLD IDEA’ of MyHR.
Truth happens to a new idea as it demonstrates its value.
In the ehealth policy and strategy context truth lies in its ability to deliver apparent value to all stakeholders.

IMHO such an idea will emerge and the real question is whether we have the courage to adopt it.

Anonymous said...

Here is a very real challenge for the MyHR conscription folks.

https://www.www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/01/04/how-secure-is-your-account-two-factor-authentication-may-be-hackable.html

The Government has been advertising a honey pot and there will be a few looking to test this method.

I am assuming we get notified when a record is created for me and my family so we can verify it is correct and set up all the military grade security controls and privacy settings.

Anonymous said...

To the best of my knowledge the ADHA does not plan on notifying anyone that they have had a My Health Record created for them other than to do a bit of advertising. Such arrogance.

At the least I would expect to receive a letter in the mail to the address registered against my Medicare Number and inviting me to cancel my MHR record if I do not want one.

Will Mr Kelsey agree to that? Hopefully a journalist somewhere will ask him and the Minister.

Anonymous said...

@10:59, yes that might prove to be a real doozy. It is a concern. I am sure the likes of google and apple will patch pretty quick, myGOV MyHR? Well Government will take a bit longer to react and implement.

Anonymous said...

@10:58 AM. Tim Kelsey has discovered electronic communications hasn’t he? A simple email from MyGOV would do the trick, or via Medicare who would have email or text addresses for everyone with a Medicare card?

Seems a bit of a cowboy approach.

Anonymous said...

That all involves two-factor authentication. Oh dear ministers what to do? All parties including independents will wear this one, all for not doing enough. Would be wise to stop opt out and at the very least the now published vulnerability should be communicated to those would have setup 2FA.

Sometimes little gestures earn the biggest trust

Bernard Robertson-Dunn said...

Not only does ADHA not appear to have any plans to inform people they have a myhr, there doesn't seem to be any plan to educate hem why and how to use it.

Do they really expect people to work it out for themselves?

Given the widespread ignorance about how to opt-out, the most probable outcome is that it will just languish.

And talking about outcomes, Tim's tweet about ADHA's predicted outcomes for 2019 contains not a single improvement in health care. In other words, ADHA is failing to achieve its purpose as stated in its annual report:

"The Agency was established to improve health outcomes for Australians through the delivery of digital innovation, health systems and services."

Anonymous said...

Just went looking to download the app for my he tat is presented in their advertising. None of the four apps seem to resemble the posters and flyers. So before deciding I looked at the reviews. One is no longer available, two have only had a few reviews and are quite old. But behold HealthEngine bucks the trend, very suspiciously IMHO but I invite readers to check the App Store reviews “most recent”.

Anonymous said...

@3:39PM. Certainly does appear a little suspicious. Paid reviews are not uncommon. A quick google of “paid app reviews” will give a sense of avalaibility, types of packages and costs.

For a comparison, have a look at “Candy Crush”. Big following, 1.2 Billion downloads and probably attracts followers who are more likely to leave a review and a comment. The achieve an average of 3 a day.

There’s no gray area here – this practice violates the Google Play Developer Program Policies and Apple’s App Store Review Guidelines. It can result in the removal of suspect reviews, the removal of the app, or even the expulsion of the developer from the program.

Anonymous said...

My Health Record isn't anything like what the government says it is either.

Anonymous said...

It's a pity the Auditor General doesn't know this. Looks like he will be wasting his time and resources auditing something that isn't what it's purported to be. Such a travesty.

Anonymous said...

This weeks poll- I think come March Tim Kelsey will step down. This will be spun as having completed he objectives and is the opportunity contractually to depart. He can notch up the MyHR communications campaign, National strategy and Framework for Action. The MyHR future I am not sure on, Tims departure would certainly reset the blame clock.

Anonymous said...

@ 10:58am "At the least I would expect to receive a letter in the mail to the address registered against my Medicare Number and inviting me to cancel my MHR record if I do not want one. "

The whole concept is based on the premise that you are supposed to be "informed" and already know that if you didn't already opt-out, then you have opted-in! Which is a total crock of …….

Besides, given the number of letters they would have to send, I think it would overwhelm both their systems to produce them and Australia Post to deliver them, given the volume that would we required.

Anonymous said...

Yes and remember the Opt Out Trials. They sent letters then, but because most people don't know that you have to update your address for Medicare when you move, or die, or leave your house because of domestic violence: -
They sent letters to dead people (and created records for them);
They sent letters to the wrong address
They sent letters to estranged partner addresses, placing people at risk.

Anyway, people who opt for email notifications do not see the need to update their mailing address.
I suppose sending faxes would be out of the question?

Dr Ian Colclough said...

@10:20 PM it just shows how little they understood about the health system. They knew the Medicare database was not source to be relied upon; NEHTA had already demonstrated it was full of duplicates, aliases, deceased names, etc. They claimed to have sanitized it before they used it to allocated IHI's to every Australian but subsequently it has been shown that instead
of sanitizing the database they just went ahead willy nilly. Big mistake.

Anonymous said...

AnonymousJanuary 06, 2019 3:39 PM. You might be right. The pattern seems very suspicious and the names are a bit out there. Sad if true, the concept was good but the owners have proven to be of the underbelly clan.

Bernard Robertson-Dunn said...

According to the Global Digital Health Partnership website
https://www.gdhp.org/

"The vision of the GDHP is to support governments and health system reformers to improve the health and well-being of their citizens through the best use of evidence-based digital technologies.

The GDHP was initiated by the Australian Digital Health Agency."

I wonder if the ADHA was aware of The International Society of Digital Medicine.

Their website http://www.isdm.org.cn/aspcms/about/about-19.html says

"(ISDM) was discussed and voted to establish on June 17, 2016 in Nanjing, China, under the theme of “Promoting International Cooperation in Digital Medicine”, by a total of 79 leading scientists in digital medicine from 28 countries and regions, including China, USA, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, the UK, etc.

The objectives of the Society are to join together groups and individuals in an international organization in order to establish a platform for academic exchange and collaboration in digital medicine among scientists from different countries who are devoted to digital medicine research and application to improve diagnosis and treatment, thus promoting the development of medicine.

The Society shall establish an apolitical mechanism to promote communication on digital medicine, which is based on principles of openness, equity, transparency, and non-discrimination, while respecting country sovereignty and avoiding interference with domestic policies."

According to http://www.isdm.org.cn/upLoad/file/20160706/14677682997550291.pdf

there are over 90 council members from all round the world, including 43 from China, 18 from the USA and four Australians. There are 76 professors,

The ISDM was established in 2016 and publishes a journal
http://www.digitmedicine.com/

Compared with the ISDM vision and its publications, the GDHP work streams look rather ho hum. Two of the work streams are Cyber Security and Interoperability. Hardly cutting edge medical science. Rather like the myhr.

I wonder why Australia decided to re-invent the wheel. A bolt hole for the ADHA's CEO? It would give him an out from the ANAO review and another year to find someone who would employ him.

Anonymous said...

Agree Bernard, one would seem to be about health and the other about wealth.

Bernard Robertson-Dunn said...

Well, that's one of GDHP's work streams out of the way:

HHS cybersecurity guidance ramps up pressure to protect data

https://www.healthdatamanagement.com/news/hhs-cybersecurity-guidance-ramps-up-pressure-to-protect-data?brief=00000152-14ad-d1cc-a5fa-7cff19540000

"New cybersecurity best practices from the Department of Health and Human Services are more than helpful suggestions for provider organizations—they set security practices that are likely to become the de facto standard industry wide."

The new guidance is available here
https://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/planning/405d/Documents/HICP-Main-508.pdf

Interoperability probably has further to go, but progress is being made by others:
Interoperability experts welcome new normative version of FHIR
https://www.healthdatamanagement.com/news/interoperability-experts-welcome-new-normative-version-of-fhir

and anyway, Jared Kushner has a plan:
https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/jared-kushner-says-trump-administration-has-new-plan-interoperability

That was in March 2018, so they should be almost finished by now.

Anonymous said...

And then there is this Bernard. http://andhealth.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Digital-Health_Creating-a-New-Growth-Industry-in-Australia.pdf

Keeps the herd feed as the follow the cash monsoons.

Bernard Robertson-Dunn said...

Anon January 08, 2019 3:59 PM

Thanks for that, I was not aware of yet another evangelist, eager to cash in on the digital health bubble.

According to LinkedIn Bronwyn Le Grice is a lawyer.

I get the impression that the people who are most enthusiastic about Digital Health are the least well educated in the core skills and knowledge needed to transform clinical medicine.

ANDHealth does have one thing in common with ADHA apart, from a zealous belief in technology solutions, their agenda seems untroubled by health outcomes, never mind identifying and addressing the problems facing health care.

According to that document "four roundtables were convened to explore interrelated but diverse areas relevant to creating an ecosystem within which both digital health innovation and commercialisation can prosper.

The four key areas explored were:
• Technology development
• Regulation
• Investment
• Market entry / Implementation"

IMHO, another example of knowing the solution, but not understanding the problem.

BTW, if you know where to look, the problems of health care have been identified and discussed for decades. The problems haven't changed, but the proposed solutions have, usually recommendations to adopt the latest technology fad. The disconnect between problems and solutions is wondrous to behold.