iEntry 10th Anniversary
RSS
Newsletter
Advertising
Marissa Mayer, Google (Photo Credit: Wikipedia)
Following the debut of Google's pilot program with the Cleveland Clinic, more news emerged about their Health efforts. Judging by the screenshots on the official Google blog, the design follows the typical look and feel of a Google product (think whitespace.)
"Google Health aims to solve an urgent need that dovetails with our overall mission of organizing patient information and making it accessible and useful," Mayer said on her post. "Through our health offering, our users will be empowered to collect, store, and manage their own medical records online."
She noted four points of difference Google sees with what its Health service will do in comparison to the competition. Topping the list - privacy and security of personal health data:
Google Health will protect the privacy of your health information by giving you complete control over your data. We won't sell or share your data without your explicit permission. Our privacy policy and practices have been developed in thoughtful collaboration with experts from the Google Health Advisory Council.
Third-party interoperability, portability of data, and a clean, useful interface also rated among Mayer's points. As she noted interest in feedback about the service when it debuts in the coming months, it sounds like Google has more to do before this product is healthy enough to meet the public.
Publish A Comment
| Popular WPN Business Resources |
 |
 |
|
|
|
-
Email Marketing Not Dead Yet
Because email marketing is one of the oldest forms of Internet... -
Jason Falls Predicts Google Will Buy Twitter
It is clear that Twitter is a valuable tool for business. -
Goodbye Vista, Hello Windows 7
Microsoft released its latest edition of Windows on October 22nd to...
     |
Is this really so safe?
First, there is no such thing as a completely safe, hack proof computer or web site.
I would want to see legislation passed in every country that such a service sets up in, to make sure that if a patients records are breached they are amongst the first to be informed. Also, that it is the patient, not the doctor, who makes them conveniently available.
We all know about the Californian laws and how they protected a number of people who had records unlawfully obtained from a firm they had nothing to do with! The firm just kept records on people and sold them to banks, prospective employers and didn't give two hoots about if their records were accurate or not, but identity theft became a reality.
Think about how sensitive these health records could be - people who were raped, sexually abused children, people with STI's or STD's, people who went to their doctor about genetic concerns. This sounds like a good black mail list.
Sometimes convenience isn't worth the risk, but that should be left to the patient to decide.