Live data from Hacker News

Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

nytimes.com

201–206 of 206 posts

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#201
post #41

There are some major hurdles for these SV companies to overcome if they want any level of success in this arena. EPIC and Cerner together hold over 50% market share of EHR systems in American hospitals. Their interoperability and patient facing applications are a joke. EPIC actively makes it difficult for third parties to build on top of their system. Sure, these SV companies have figured out how to build great tech…

>Sure, these SV companies have figured out how to build great tech at scale

Their tech is much disliked by most doctors. There's even a protest group LetDoctorsBeDoctors with a humorous song video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB_tSFJsjsw)

There is also a fully functional heavily tested free open source solution that most doctors prefer in surveys, called VistA or Openvista.

> Doctors at the VA really like VistA. In Medscape’s 2016 EHR Report, VistA was the top rated EHR overall and the most preferred solution for use as a clinical tool. http://hitconsultant.net/2017/05/10/reasons-not-to-replace-v...

I think that what Epic and Cerner have figured out is how to crack the corporate sales process. Doctors and patients don't choose the EHR system, managers do, and I guess Epic and Cerner are good at selling to them.

If any startups want to do a Red Hat type model building on top of VistA I hope they do well.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#202
post #8

Yeah, nothing's going to happen. Compliance costs are too high for any of Silicon Valley's business models to work.

The companies mentioned in the article "Apple, Google, Microsoft and other tech giants" have quite a bit of money for costs. Though for hospital they may need more of an IBM/Oracle corporate type model rather than apps.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#204
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is for emails originating from insurance companies. That was the part I misunderstood. I thought it was for physician offices sending information to the insurance company. > Pretty simple. As far as physicians communicating with each other and pharmacies, they typically use faxes and phone calls. And that's an issue that could be addressed if all entities had a PKI set up such that they could communicate onlin…

Yes, if you wanted to extend a nationwide system for any and all PHI communications, your idea would be a good approach. In a more wonderful world than what we live in today, the US government would have setup a simple, unreadable (even by them) secure channel for everyday citizens to be able to transfer sensitive data to verified businesses and other citizens. They can't see past the criminals using it to subvert th…

> In a more wonderful world than what we live in today, the US government would have setup a simple, unreadable (even by them) secure channel for everyday citizens to be able to transfer sensitive data to verified businesses and other citizens.

We pretty much already have that with the PKI system that web browsers (and other programs) check when verifying certificates for various websites we connect to (including this one). It doesn't require government intervention. It does require configuring servers that doctors, pharmacists, hospitals, labs, insurance companies, etc use to authenticate themselves with each other and a number of authorities to verify their identities (like the CA bundle that your web browser uses to verify that the server you connect to is indeed Hackernews and not some rogue entity).

PKI is a powerful tool which certainly can be used in a healthcare setting. Unfortunately, because of organization inertia, it's probably not going to happen (despite the fact that the technology behind it has been around for decades).

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#205
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, if you wanted to extend a nationwide system for any and all PHI communications, your idea would be a good approach. In a more wonderful world than what we live in today, the US government would have setup a simple, unreadable (even by them) secure channel for everyday citizens to be able to transfer sensitive data to verified businesses and other citizens. They can't see past the criminals using it to subvert th…

> In a more wonderful world than what we live in today, the US government would have setup a simple, unreadable (even by them) secure channel for everyday citizens to be able to transfer sensitive data to verified businesses and other citizens. We pretty much already have that with the PKI system that web browsers (and other programs) check when verifying certificates for various websites we connect to (including thi…

>We pretty much already have that with the PKI system that web browsers (and other programs) check when verifying certificates for various websites we connect to (including this one).

As an aside, it took a seismic event (the confirmation of mass government spying) to actually get it implemented properly, and the US government did file a few lawsuits about being able to openly break encryption with a back door. We're fortunate to still have it fully intact.

>It doesn't require government intervention. It does require configuring servers that doctors, pharmacists, hospitals, labs, insurance companies, etc use to authenticate themselves with each other and a number of authorities to verify their identities (like the CA bundle that your web browser uses to verify that the server you connect to is indeed Hackernews and not some rogue entity).

Yes, that's more in line with the solution that we implemented (well paid to have implemented) with the outbound email interception and website redirection. All PHI goes through TLS via the website.

>PKI is a powerful tool which certainly can be used in a healthcare setting. Unfortunately, because of organization inertia, it's probably not going to happen (despite the fact that the technology behind it has been around for decades).

Ironically, they use it heavily in integration from third parties. Their SFTP/FTPS was locked down. They use a login whitelist and PGP signatures for login, everything must be encrypted with asymmetric PGP keys, folders were locked down, the works.

Many of our larger clients requested that all email and fax correspondence go exclusively through those SFTP/FTPS channels. Smaller clients had difficulty handling that on their own and usually had to call in a local support guy eventually.

>PKI is a powerful tool which certainly can be used in a healthcare setting. Unfortunately, because of organization inertia, it's probably not going to happen (despite the fact that the technology behind it has been around for decades).

It certainly happens in the bigger companies. They don't mess around. It's the smaller companies that struggle with it because they don't readily have the expertise.

Re: Big Tech Is Going After Health Care

#206
post #161
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, no studies linked, just a quote collection and an interview?

I am not aware of any study (that has been made public, remember they always have that option at the end) by a pharmaceutical company or university that was set out to test whether water fasting for 5+ days is beneficial in treating or curing disease. Several reasons: 1. They conducted one, but didn't like the results. 2. "Don't ask what you don't want to know the answer to" applies here - there is ZERO benefit in di…

Sorry for being so dismissive, but with so much noise out there, it feels like a waste of everyone's time when such a claim is made without the science to back it up.

For sure, there are seemingly endless possibilities that are not being thoroughly explored by the many scientific bodies, but I can understand why that is.

Thanks for taking the time to reply with more information/research.

Post reply on HN