Rick Scott fighting back the encroachment of Big Brother

redrumloa

redrumloa

Active Member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
14,970
Reaction score
2,154
And the local left wing media is going bonkers.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/fl-prescrip ... ory?page=1

There is a problem with "Pill Mills" in Florida. In response the state wants a "prescription tracking system" which will maintain a database of every individual's prescription drug purchase. Any politician who supports such a database needs to be shown the door and never hold office again. What ever happened to the concern of right to privacy? What about medical privacy?
 
redrumloa said:
And the local left wing media is going bonkers.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/fl-prescrip ... ory?page=1

There is a problem with "Pill Mills" in Florida. In response the state wants a "prescription tracking system" which will maintain a database of every individual's prescription drug purchase. Any politician who supports such a database needs to be shown the door and never hold office again. What ever happened to the concern of right to privacy? What about medical privacy?
Click to expand...

Thing is, chances are such a database already exists in one form or another. If you can access a person's medical records, you'll be able to view whatever drugs have been prescribed, what operations they've had and so on. I don't see that it would be doing so from different states unless there are serious differences between computer systems.

As for big brother? Seriously? Having up to date medical records is vital if you're in any way serious about protecting peoples health. You may not know the name of a proscription drug you're on or unable otherwise to tell them. If they give you a general aesthetic and that reacts with what you're already on... Not to mention anything you're allergic to.
 
huh? what's the problem here?

Where I live in civilized NY my Aunt's list of drugs (at least about 6 at this time) is known to the doctor and the pharmacist - and frankly, myself as I made sure a couple of years ago to track her refiles so she gets them in a timely manner.

Both of these people have a computerized database of my Aunt's medications: they know when she is supposed to get what, how much and how often.

What the heck is wrong with that?

maybe a rush limbaugh type person wouldn't be able to get his oxycotin illegally if someone is paying attention?
 
We are not talking about doctor's records, we are talking about the gov keeping a database. Don't tell me you believe it when they say this will only be used to combat pill mills. That is like saying you believed the gov when they said the Patriot Act would only be used on terrorists.

What a doctor prescribes you should be between you and your doctor. There are ways to combat pill mills without law abiding citizens giving up their right to privacy. You mean to tell me that you cannot imagine such a database being abused?

Exactly how long did it take for the Patriot Act to be used against US citizens?
 
The same people who think it's OK for the government to know what pills you take are also the ones with all the street cameras pointed at them, and think that's OK too.

That is, until Street View Google comes along, and then that's invading their privacy. Explain that. :lol:
 
Fade said:
The same people who think it's OK for the government to know what pills you take are also the ones with all the street cameras pointed at them, and think that's OK too.

That is, until Street View Google comes along, and then that's invading their privacy. Explain that. :lol:
Click to expand...

Easily explained. Your premise is false. Since what you said is not true there is no explanation required.
 
redrumloa said:
We are not talking about doctor's records, we are talking about the gov keeping a database. Don't tell me you believe it when they say this will only be used to combat pill mills. That is like saying you believed the gov when they said the Patriot Act would only be used on terrorists.

What a doctor prescribes you should be between you and your doctor. There are ways to combat pill mills without law abiding citizens giving up their right to privacy. You mean to tell me that you cannot imagine such a database being abused?
Click to expand...
I really don't see why the database needs to be kept by the government. how is the medical community supposed to access then? They are the ones who need the info to make sure patients get what they need. The only time the gov (police) needs to get involved is when someone realizes a crime is in process.
 
The only time the gov (police) needs to get involved is when someone realizes a crime is in process.
Click to expand...

HellooOOOOoo, fishing trips!! PATRIOT act is only for terrorism, too, right?

It sucks, because a medical records are very important to patient treatment. But that much data in one location becomes very valuable. And you know where that leads. :/
 
'That much data' is the bigger issue. How do we handle this? I think for mobility in our society it is better that some sort of data availability for medical providers must exist.

For example, take a diabetic in Florida and say he comes to Minnesota to visit and learn what being cold really means. Now that diabetic is traveling alone and no one knows of his condition. The diabetic goes down in the hotel lobby. How valuable would it be for the EMTs to have immediate knowledge of the diabetic condition? In this example it may well be the difference of life or death.

What we've seen in the past is if the government doesn't do this stuff then the private sector will. If we relate this to other medical costs in the US we know that that US has a medical system that's on par with the rest of the modern world and twice as expensive. We know medical professionals at one time opposed government regulation because they wanted to do it. Thus, the private healthcare industry was born and now a non-doctor still has the power to regulate and they charge a 30% premium for saying no.

I'm 'afraid' of the government doing this. I'm even more 'afraid' of costs and headaches if the private sector doing this. So is the answer to not do it anywhere? I'm not so sure that's any better. The answer here for each of us is which devil do you perfer.
 
'That much data' is the bigger issue. How do we handle this?
Click to expand...

That really is the question of the time, isn't it? How do you protect that data that so many agencies and companies would pay big $$$ to access?

Honestly, I don't think you can.

I'm 'afraid' of the government doing this. I'm even more 'afraid' of costs and headaches if the private sector doing this. So is the answer to not do it anywhere? I'm not so sure that's any better. The answer here for each of us is which devil do you perfer.
Click to expand...

The only answer I come with is to distribute it. If the data doesn't exist anywhere in aggregate, it's MUCH harder to exploit. So keep something on your person that contains this data. Much like how some people carry a bracelet stating a serious medical condition or allergy, make a bracelet with a bio-metrically encrypted USB storage device on it. Only your password or a drop of your blood can access it.

There's no reason it couldn't be done with today's technology. Encrypted USB sticks are already common. The biometric reader portion wouldn't need to be on the stick, it could be a device attached to the records computer at the admitting desk. Still not perfect. The device could get lost or damaged. But I just can't think of anything better.
 
iWrath all good ideas.

The question for me is, is an encrypted USB stick any better? For a bit of background over the last few months I've driven encrypted technology into the organization. I directly use an 8GB Ironkey. As you stated the problem here is loss of the stick. This would lead me to a combined approach. Make many diverse databases. The USB Stick would be the only point of central collection.

This, however, returns us to the question. Who owns these databaseS. I'd suspect it'd need to be a combination of government and private sectors.

Many more databases has it's pro and cons vs a single database. Let's say there are 50 databases out there. One pro is a hacker would need to attack 50 databases instead of 1 to get all your information. One con is we now have 50x the system and database administrators. This con leads us to see that many more people have access to some of your information. Data theft from inside the organization is more likely as one increases headcount.
 
I've spun this data collection side conversation off as a separate thread, as I think it's more interesting than the original topic here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top