Live data from Hacker News

Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

nytimes.com

71–80 of 206 posts

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#71

As someone who most recently worked in product at a healthcare startup I found the most difficult thing about innovation in the space is the cost of compliance/regulation. When you work in an industry that is so highly regulated, and assuming you are working at a company that follows the rule of law, how do you actually "disrupt" a set of problems in this industry when there is so little wiggle room for doing things…

> fax communication is HIPAA-compliant whereas email/SMS are not

I thought that HIPAA had the provision that stated that encrypted communication is compliant. That is, if the email or SMS was encrypted, then it would be in compliance with the act.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#72
Physician here. SV Tech will win because it is customer centric. Traditional Healthcare tech is enterprise centric - the precept on which they base their strategies is 'economies of scale'. People are not widgets. Economies of scale (aka corporate controlled healthcare) do not apply. As institutions grow larger, eddy currents of dominance develop - fiefdoms that compete for control, power and share of the budget. There are so many layers of middle management that the most popular complaint is that everyone is a manager. Our hospital actually has 5x as many employees as there are patients in it. I know of no other industry where this skewed statistic exists. Can you imagine an airliner with twice as many stewards as passengers? Perhaps the legal profession is an exception, where you have so many bodies tending to a trial. In healthcare, patients are lost in this machine and the cacophony of voices speaking to them is a disservice. Perhaps tho in this era of the consumer age, some patients conflate quantity with quality and might actually feel 'more is better'. If healthcare is delivered through a watch on your wrist instead of an army of servants, the layperson might be able to focus his/her understanding on the single voice their device has.

The other secret weapon of SV is that it promises to get people to open up their pocketbooks to actually pay for their own healthcare. Government will adore them for that. If you think that will never happen, just stop and think for a minute. People shell out hundreds of dollars a year for the privilege of being tracked and being advertising targets. All because the mobile device caters to their impulse for 'connectedness'. Imagine if this device promised a longer life, better sex, better sleep, less disease. And it showed you with colorful cartoon graphs how much better you were every time you asked it. Forget the fact that many of these parameters are only relevant to the big picture. Statistics apply to populations and any attempt to assign characteristics from population studies to a given individual carry uncertainty. They never tell you how big the error bars are, do they? Certainly a better diet and more exercise confer health benefits. But trying to 'gamify' this data will just add a cognitive burden and most likely will lead to more popular misconceptions and misinterpretations. Or perhaps it will be a new social nexus?When I am in a Starbux or Panera, there are always a few conversations my ears cannot avoid as people share their health problems over a sandwich and a coffee. And I cannot help laughing at how ironic the whole HIPAA thing is.

Ultimately I fear that tech will foster the return of snake oil salesmen, on a massive scale. We are in a deregulation mania now and I think healthcare will soon fall under Trump's razor and he will encourage SVTech to make their move.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#73
post #53
post #7

Good. I spent a few years working in a medical IoT startup, and the current state of the "mainstream" medical monitoring technology is not inspiring. During a brainstorming meeting, I asked one of our cofounders, a physician, to tell me about some of the problems he had seen in health. Don't try and solve it, just lets talk about problems. He said that by far one of the most common causes for re-hospitalization is co…

Interesting you bring up heart failure readmissions. Not saying they aren't a problem, but here is a fascinating study in JAMA that argues that places with lower readmissions have higher (worse) mortality. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/article-abst... Not sure we (I'm a physician) understand even what the problems we need technology to solve are. But yes, we need technology to help (find and) solve…

Couldn't this finding be explained by the fact that the hospitals with lower readmissions tend to be poorer (since poorer patients are less likely to be able to afford care)? I only took a quick look, but I didn't see how the paper accounts for this and other possible causality issues. On the other hand, it's certainly plausible to me that lower readmissions can cause higher mortality.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#74

I am a big believer that we have already discovered a safe, free, plentiful lever against some of the most high profile diseases (cancer, Alzheimer’s, some mental illnesses) out there in fasting/calorie restriction/keto. I highly doubt it will ever become mainstream for the simple reason that no healthcare or big tech co can make money from telling people to eat in a way that induces ketosis. Science of Fasting doc:…

Insane how we both get downvoted isn't it? Oh well. Another decade or two before people wake up.

Agree with you, so much of our economy and social structure is built on the fact that people get sick - and either stay sick or get medicated for the foreseeable future. Sad. All we can do is mention it, even though we get shut down quickly be it online or IRL.

Mandatory anecdote: I cured severe arthritis in the knee 6 years ago through a 30-day water fast. It was gone by day 20 or so, and stayed gone for 6 years now. It's sad that so many people suffer needlessly.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#75
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure email can be HIPAA compliant as long as you implement the system using the established guidelines.

Re email: Because you don't know if the destination server is encrypted (you send emails from your server and it finds the destination), any email must be intercepted at your server and a hyperlink to a secure site inserted in place of the email body. The email becomes just a notification via SMTP. The recipient then goes to the site and logs in to view the email. The PHI is what you care about (and it's, very, very…

> Re email: Because you don't know if the destination server is encrypted (you send emails from your server and it finds the destination), any email must be intercepted at your server and a hyperlink to a secure site inserted in place of the email body

Couldn't this be solved by just encrypting the email itself? Even the headers could be encrypted along with the body.

On the subject of fax machines, would they still be compliant if they're connected to a VOIP system?

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#77
post #7

Good. I spent a few years working in a medical IoT startup, and the current state of the "mainstream" medical monitoring technology is not inspiring. During a brainstorming meeting, I asked one of our cofounders, a physician, to tell me about some of the problems he had seen in health. Don't try and solve it, just lets talk about problems. He said that by far one of the most common causes for re-hospitalization is co…

Failure to market an IoT product is unfortunately my experience as well. I hope the medical industry gets better, re-hospitalization sounds ridiculous for something easy to detect.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#78
post #62
post #7

Good. I spent a few years working in a medical IoT startup, and the current state of the "mainstream" medical monitoring technology is not inspiring. During a brainstorming meeting, I asked one of our cofounders, a physician, to tell me about some of the problems he had seen in health. Don't try and solve it, just lets talk about problems. He said that by far one of the most common causes for re-hospitalization is co…

The tech is the easy part. Integrating into a 24/7 high turn-over environment where all employees, IT included, are stretched to the max, is the real issue.

And pumping the data in to their myriad EHR systems, getting those records associated correctly across those systems+, the unintuitive UI/UX problems you'll inevitably face, as well as training issues. And God help you if it's a place where they home brew their own solutions instead of going with a vendor. My company is in the health care space, as well, and a lot of the problems _do_ look easy ("that's just a CRUD app, right?" easy) until it comes time to get them adopted in the health care space.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#79
post #53
post #7

Good. I spent a few years working in a medical IoT startup, and the current state of the "mainstream" medical monitoring technology is not inspiring. During a brainstorming meeting, I asked one of our cofounders, a physician, to tell me about some of the problems he had seen in health. Don't try and solve it, just lets talk about problems. He said that by far one of the most common causes for re-hospitalization is co…

Interesting you bring up heart failure readmissions. Not saying they aren't a problem, but here is a fascinating study in JAMA that argues that places with lower readmissions have higher (worse) mortality. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/article-abst... Not sure we (I'm a physician) understand even what the problems we need technology to solve are. But yes, we need technology to help (find and) solve…

Why do we need technology to help improve lives when so many diseases (type 2 diabetes, Crohn's, IBS, high blood pressure, arthritis, and dozens of others) can already be reversed and prevented by simply changing a person's diet and lifestyle habits? It's really quite insane that people would rather take pills for the rest of their lives to treat symptoms of a disease than actually getting rid of it altogether by giving up food habits.

Part of it is also due to traditional physicians being so dismissive of the role nutrition plays in a person's well being.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#80
post #79
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting you bring up heart failure readmissions. Not saying they aren't a problem, but here is a fascinating study in JAMA that argues that places with lower readmissions have higher (worse) mortality. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/article-abst... Not sure we (I'm a physician) understand even what the problems we need technology to solve are. But yes, we need technology to help (find and) solve…

Why do we need technology to help improve lives when so many diseases (type 2 diabetes, Crohn's, IBS, high blood pressure, arthritis, and dozens of others) can already be reversed and prevented by simply changing a person's diet and lifestyle habits? It's really quite insane that people would rather take pills for the rest of their lives to treat symptoms of a disease than actually getting rid of it altogether by giv…

Well as a physician, you can't really force your patient to exercise and eat better. The best you can do is prescribe a medication to treat the symptoms, tell your patient to exercise and eat better, and send them off.

Do you have an alternative to prescribing medication for type 2 diabetes and Crohn's? Do you think doctors should simply withhold care since it's their patients' faults that they have those conditions?

Post reply on HN