Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lhn5 who wrote (18314)	12/11/2006 6:17:49 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

You are correct, Lhn5, of course, and probably a bit too generous at the same time. The folks behind this Dossia initiative, or whatever it's called, are certainly out of touch with reality big time, is the way I'd put it, and they're probably on their way to catching up to the two guys shown below, who obviously "lost it" a very long time ago, too. My only hesitancy in "airing" this video up until now has been out of a sense of horror and shame, since these two jamokes work out of BoA's offices in New York City: "Bank of America sings U2's One" youtube.com Fortunately, some of the viewers' comments beneath the screen make up for some of the absurdity. The first two viewers' comments: --- chachaboots (4 days ago) says: Corporate Douchebags NewWaveDJ (4 days ago) says: Holy crap. This feels like a Amway (oh sorry, World Wide Dream builders) and they're fake religious band that tells you "God wants you to make money!" ------

To: Lhn5 who wrote (18314)	12/11/2006 6:52:43 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

[UK-NHS] Health officials reject requests to opt out of patient database · Department's letter says fears are not valid; · Many 'harmed by unavailability of records' John Carvel, social affairs editor Monday December 4, 2006 \| The Guardian society.guardian.co.uk Patients who have complained about the idea of having their confidential medical records uploaded on a new centralised National Health Service [NHS] database were sent letters over the weekend flatly rejecting their concerns. In an uncompromising statement, the Department of Health said nobody could have genuine grounds for claiming "substantial and unwarranted distress" as a result of having their intimate medical details included on a national computer system, known as the Spine. For that reason, "it will not agree to their request to stop the process of adding their information to the new NHS database". The department wrote to everyone who filled in a coupon, published in The Guardian on December 1, giving 10 reasons why patients might feel distressed by having their details uploaded. The department's eight-page letter argued that none of these reasons were valid. It said: "Many patients are harmed every year due to the unavailability of records, no readily accessible record of allergies and drug reactions, poor handwriting and transcription errors. Others have to repeat their painful stories over and over. Appointments are missed and tests are repeated because records go missing. "It is not a situation we can or should sustain, especially where we have the means to improve it significantly. The new systems will improve healthcare for millions of people as well as preventing thousands of unnecessary deaths." The national record would give patients more control over what was in their records and who had access to it, it added. The first summaries of patients' records are due to be uploaded in two trial areas in the spring. Initially they will include minimal information about patients' medications and allergies, but the government wants to expand the summaries to include more intimate medical data. Last night doctors' leaders said the department's letter failed to take account of patients' rights under the Data Protection Act to refuse to allow information about them to be copied from one database to another. Paul Cundy, joint chairman of the IT committee set up by the British Medical Association and Royal College of GPs, said: "Patients do not have to prove severe distress. If patients decide they do not want their medical notes to go on the national system, they have an unalienable right under the Data Protection Act to refuse." He said the department asked any patient with "unique and personal reasons for claiming substantial and unwarranted distress" to write explaining them to its Whitehall customer service centre. But Dr Cundy said this put patients in a Catch-22 situation. They were being asked to reveal to officials the specific reasons why they did not want information revealed to officials. Last week a national campaign was launched to urge people to refuse on privacy grounds to have their medical records uploaded to the national database. The campaigners released ICM poll findings which they said showed a majority of the population was hostile to Whitehall's plans. The figures show 53% of those questioned were either "strongly opposed" or "tended to oppose" the centrepiece of the Department of Health's £12bn NHS computerisation scheme. These results follow a Medix poll of doctors earlier this month, which found that 52% of GPs were not prepared to upload their clinical records to the national Spine without each patient's consent. Health department officials trying to implement the much-delayed scheme have reacted defensively to critics they call "the naysayers". The government claims there will be elaborate safeguards built into the system which will prevent unauthorised access to the intimate medical details of 50 million people. ------