Jump to content
scruffy1

don't want to make you paranoid, but...

Recommended Posts

One country isn't going to dictate such standards.

 

And if there was a standard it'd be something that'd be affordable, so for a rich place like here we'd probably end up with something like chest X-Rays being stored as 1200x800 JPGs @ 70% quality which would be a joke.

As mentioned too, there needs to be standards for culling and summarizing the data as well.

 

Whether many or any of these and plenty of other things were considered, who knows?

The other thing is you have a big variability in the amount of technology in use in private practices and the efficiency of it's use.

Lowest common denominator bullshit can keep the system decades behind where it should be.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Lowest common denominator bullshit can keep the system decades behind where it should be." << ain't that the truth ?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can use the web site to opt out now.

You need a medicare card !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and.... i'm out

 

and mr 16, and ms 24

 

 

 

i would encourage anyone who feels the government is not a responsible enough entity to be trusted with their intimate details, to opt out now... you can always change your stance later in light of how well the system is progressing, but if you stand idly by and watch the shit hit the fan, it'll be your own entrails hanging from the chandeliers of parliament

 

apparently the online opt out server is buckling under the strain.... shades of the last census, anybody ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lowest common denominator bullshit can keep the system decades behind where it should be.

 

it's bad enough when the power goes off, or the internet, or the local server dies - no results, no records, no nothing except personal memory of individuals

 

 

once the feds' centralised centre has a brainfart,it's gonna get ugly real fast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

apparently the online opt out server is buckling under the strain....

Lol. there's a great show of support for the Gov. system ...not :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

...

 

apparently the online opt out server is buckling under the strain....

Lol. there's a great show of support for the Gov. system ...not :)

 

On balance, most sheeple would probably keep their account. Us paranoid minority are crashing the system, when it goes live it would be have to handle the sheeple logging on - and it can't handle the few who are opting out.

Edited by Jeruselem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I opted in ages ago. I have chronic health problems (not serious ones, but still) that I would like any doc I go to to have access to.

 

Of course, they don't, because the records aren't there! But anyway, one lives in hope.

 

You can set up an alert system to get notified every time someone access a record. That should at least reduce the risk of unauthorised access. If the data is lost wholesale though, that's a different story. But I'm assuming if that happens, millions of people will be in the same boat and the government would have to get rid of the system and start again. (I'm not worried about my health records being public knowledge, I'm worried about identity theft).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I opted in ages ago. I have chronic health problems (not serious ones, but still) that I would like any doc I go to to have access to.

 

Of course, they don't, because the records aren't there! But anyway, one lives in hope.

 

You can set up an alert system to get notified every time someone access a record. That should at least reduce the risk of unauthorised access. If the data is lost wholesale though, that's a different story. But I'm assuming if that happens, millions of people will be in the same boat and the government would have to get rid of the system and start again. (I'm not worried about my health records being public knowledge, I'm worried about identity theft).

 

The government polices the data breach reporting system so there's breach in it's own systems, we wouldn't know and they wouldn't tell us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On balance, most sheeple would probably keep their account. Us paranoid minority are crashing the system, when it goes live it would be have to handle the sheeple logging on - and it can't handle the few who are opting out.

I somehow never get bored of your lofty flights of paranoia.

 

 

it's bad enough when the power goes off, or the internet, or the local server dies - no results, no records, no nothing except personal memory of individuals

 

 

once the feds' centralised centre has a brainfart,it's gonna get ugly real fast

It's ok, they'll be fine with you just rebooking the clients and charging the DoH twice, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

it's bad enough when the power goes off, or the internet, or the local server dies - no results, no records, no nothing except personal memory of individuals

 

 

once the feds' centralised centre has a brainfart,it's gonna get ugly real fast

It's ok, they'll be fine with you just rebooking the clients and charging the DoH twice, right?

 

 

 

can't edit the quote string, but :

 

what "normally" happens if the system fails, is i have to wing it and write longhand notes that later still get transferred to the electronic notes once the system goes back up - at no payment for the time required, and unless i then generate all the stuff i did longhand (scripts / investigation requests / letters) a second time, there is no record

and no, d.o.h. will not homour a bill where i don't personally do domething with a patient present - so no show = no dough

 

how's that for efficiency ?

 

i don't have "clients" (that's hookers and business people; i have patients. old school style)

 

if there's opportunity, the front desk attempt to reschedule booked patients (which isn't appropriate for urgent stuff), and in any case, they don't generally know who will turn up as their records won't work either, and there is no automatic backup of the day's appointments that can be accessed from a dead system

 

 

 

on the plus side, i actually really enjoy not having a screen distract me from the person i am seeing - as my typing skill is crap, i find i need to look at the keyboard to generate records, and even though i am quite capable of listening and making noted at the same time, i can't make eye contact while i look at my fingers, and there are often subtle visual cues in a conversation that float past uncaught when the computer is in play

 

the consultations without a computer are far more natural, and i get nostalgic for days of yore when the notes were more for assisting care rather than protecting my butt from medicolegal reaming - the quality of care is no better with concise notes, but the toime wasted on documenting trivial detail is unavoidable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will interesting how the "secondary use" clause on MHR gets used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will interesting how the "secondary use" clause on MHR gets used.

 

most especially for welfare recipients i would expect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" on the plus side, i actually really enjoy not having a screen distract me from the person i am seeing - as my typing skill is crap, i find i need to look at the keyboard to generate records, and even though i am quite capable of listening and making noted at the same time, i can't make eye contact while i look at my fingers, and there are often subtle visual cues in a conversation that float past uncaught when the computer is in play "

 

I thoroughly endorse the above thought process :)

 

When I visit our Doc. I enter the room with my paper record in my hand. Hand it over and he puts it down in front of him, then looks up and we talk. This is the bloke that kept an eye on me with the champix I used to help me step off the ciggs.

 

I've not opted out or in as my medical history for the last twenty years is pretty slim pickings. I dare say if I had some serious thing going on that needed up to date records then I'd feel differently. Tho with what I'm reading here, it's another half arsed attempt so far.

If somebody chooses to take my identity then I guess they will regardless of what I opt in or out of. Life's a real bitch like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the luxury of my Dad being an a retired GP, I can't get prescriptions but I do get an expert opinion at home first so I can avoid going to a doctor who will just tell me take some drugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-18/my-health-record-former-digital-transformation-boss-has-concerns/10006788?section=politics

 

" The man appointed by Malcolm Turnbull to transform the Commonwealth's digital public services has said if he was Australian he would probably opt out of the Government's controversial online health database.

...

Paul Shetler, the former head of the Government's Digital Transformation Agency, is not an Australian citizen but told the ABC if he was he would "probably" withdraw from My Health Record.

He said he took issue with the way My Health Record required users to arrange their own security settings, rather than defaulting to a more private set-up.

"I think it's problematic. Those kind of security settings kind of make sense for an opt-in system … but when it becomes an opt-out system, and you find out all your data is on there, 'oh, and by the way it's all being shared',

well, no — I think that's one of the flaws," Mr Shetler told RN Breakfast..."

 

More in the link,

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this will be like the australia card, only more bodily fluids

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-18/my-health-record-former-digital-transformation-boss-has-concerns/10006788?section=politics

 

" The man appointed by Malcolm Turnbull to transform the Commonwealth's digital public services has said if he was Australian he would probably opt out of the Government's controversial online health database.

...

Paul Shetler, the former head of the Government's Digital Transformation Agency, is not an Australian citizen but told the ABC if he was he would "probably" withdraw from My Health Record.

He said he took issue with the way My Health Record required users to arrange their own security settings, rather than defaulting to a more private set-up.

"I think it's problematic. Those kind of security settings kind of make sense for an opt-in system … but when it becomes an opt-out system, and you find out all your data is on there, 'oh, and by the way it's all being shared',

well, no — I think that's one of the flaws," Mr Shetler told RN Breakfast..."

 

More in the link,

 

My Health Record is just a rebadged PCEHR from the Rudd government. PCEHR was opt-in and it looks like the security settings default to open than closed due to the original design

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently since I live in North Queensland I needed to opt out in 2016 and I already have one.

 

I'm not impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently since I live in North Queensland I needed to opt out in 2016 and I already have one.

 

I'm not impressed.

 

yes, funny about that

 

now they're using the same protocol that they did in that "trial" to conscript the rest of the country

 

 

lack of dissent is not informed consent, but that's okay, they're liberals, so they're liberal with your "co-operation"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Apparently since I live in North Queensland I needed to opt out in 2016 and I already have one.

 

I'm not impressed.

 

yes, funny about that

 

now they're using the same protocol that they did in that "trial" to conscript the rest of the country

 

 

lack of dissent is not informed consent, but that's okay, they're liberals, so they're liberal with your "co-operation"

 

 

The trial roped in about 1 million users ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, here's my handout for patients :

 

My Health Record – please read this information

In medicine we are obliged to gain "informed consent" for any intervention, most definitely if there is potential for an adverse outcome, yet the government demonstrates that "uniformed lack of dissent" is enough to let them do what they want. I strongly recommend that all Australians without complex and life-threatening medical issues take time to consider the potential consequences of not opting out of the "My Health Record" while they can. You can always reconsider at leisure, but with regards to being conscripted, should you later decide against continued inclusion - "you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave."

The government shows a complete absence of conscience in not being completely open about a significant change in arrangements which has potential to affect all Australians and informing them individually as a matter of course, rather than imposing an unfair arrangement on their behalf without requiring explicit agreement.

My recommendation is that you check the following information and then make an informed choice. If the government doesn't want to tell you about their pending arrangements, I feel it's my duty as your doctor to bring this matter to your attention so that you are able to have the opportunity to defer your participation until the system is tested in the real world. No ethics committee would allow me to undertake a potentially dangerous trial without your voluntary agreement, and only then if you had no other acceptable options.

For some patients this system should hopefully be a useful tool for assisting in their care, but for most people it has much more risk than benefit. It's your record, sure. So it makes sense that it's your choice whether you need to enable it at this point in your life, or whether you accept its limitations at a later date where it justifies the risk. Hopefully by then my paranoia will be proven baseless, but perhaps you'll be pleased that you delayed being given an unproven treatment.

the case for opting in :

https://theconversation.com/my-health-record-the-case-for-opting-in-99850

the case for opting out :

https://theconversation.com/my-health-record-the-case-for-opting-out-99302

further reading worth consideration :

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-18/my-health-record-former-digital-transformation-boss-has-concerns/10006788

the current privacy policies of My Health Record (a long read, not for the faint of heart) :

https://www.myhealthrecord.gov.au/about/privacy-policy

If you decide to have a record created, you need do nothing and it will happen automatically.

If you personally request the pending automatic enrolment to be put on hold, you are free to opt in at any later time. If the government had continued to enrol people at their own request, this action would not be required, and I would not have needed to encourage your active dissent to allow you the same freedom of choice. A choice you will lose on 15 October this year if you let it lapse.

To opt out : https://www.myhealthrecord.gov.au/for-you-your-family/opt-out-my-health-record

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×