Ken Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For the edification of my students I maintain a list [not complete] of 
> the various enquiries, task forces, committees, reports, etc. that have 
> meant to give direction to E-health in Australia.
> 
> What is particularly ironic is that no such list exists on any current 
> government (or NEHTA) web site (although most of these reports are still 
> retrievable from the archives if you know what to search for)!

Yes. In engineering practice, failures are greeted with both dismay and delight 
- delight  because they provide an opportunity to learn how to do things better 
- they are seized upon and dissected in excruciating detail, or if more 
protean, collected and statistically analysed to death, in order to extract 
every last clue about how to avoid the same mistakes and failure modes in the 
future. As a result, buildings, even very tall ones, don't collapse (unless 
pushed), bridges hardly every fall down, lifts don't plummet and modern cars 
tend not to break down very much (some makes excepted). Even computer hardware 
is so much more reliable today than it used to be, through failure analayis. In 
health informatics though, failures are forgotten and swept under the carpet as 
rapidly as possible. Or they are rebranded as "indefinitely deferred 
successes"...

Tim C
_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to