Tim Wilson communicates in his own way:
https://www.cessnockadvertiser.com.au/story/5541491/government-mp-opts-out-of-e-health-record/
--
David Boxall| For when the One Great Scorer comes
| To mark against your name,
http://david.boxall.id.au
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:04:06AM +1000, Jim Birch wrote:
> Suppose, for example, the government billed anyone without a MyHR record the
> full cost of unnecessary duplicate tests, would this change attitudes.
That sounds like coercion, and punishment of those who exercise their right to
opt
I wrote that APF quote at the bottom, a while ago. I also wrote these,
more recently.
https://privacy.org.au/campaigns/myhr/for-sale-your-privacy-and-your-health-data/
https://privacy.org.au/campaigns/myhr/opt-out-of-my-health-record/the-truth-about-my-health-record/
On Thursday, 19 July 2018 15:44:43 AEST Jim Birch wrote:
> This is the version 1.0 product.
It's actually V2.0. The AMA published this press release on 15th Oct 2015:
"The Government has proposed that Practice Incentive Program e-health payments
be tied to doctor use of the MyHealth Record
On Thursday, 19 July 2018 16:24:13 AEST Karl Auer wrote:
> But it has to be done the right way. Setting up a massive, poorly controlled,
> poorly secured, poorly managed and poorly curated helth database on all
> Australians is not the way. It's not just a V1.0 problem, it is a
> fundamentally
On 19/07/2018 3:44 PM, Jim Birch wrote:
This is the version 1.0 product. ...
Looks more like an alpha to me. Making a half-baked system opt-out
smacks of desperation.
First Dog speaks:
On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 15:44 +1000, Jim Birch wrote:
> This is the version 1.0 product.
Yep. And Rule Number One is, never deploy v1.0.
> Declaring that it is no use and never will be seems perhaps a little
> too grandiose to me.
That's a straw man. MyHR's usefulness is certainly in serious
This is the version 1.0 product. ATM it contains very little information
but is obviously going to expand. This will take time given history,
legacy systems, resistance to change, risks, etc.
Declaring that it is no use and never will be seems perhaps a little too
grandiose to me.
Change
On Thursday, 19 July 2018 11:01:23 AEST Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
> I agree [that the fundamental reasons for centralised medical records are
> cost savings and better health care]. My Health Record isn't one of them,
> its a summary system that required significant GP effort to input and
On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 10:04 +1000, Jim Birch wrote:
> [some stuff]
The whole system is founded on a huge betrayal - saying it would be
opt-in, then flipping it to opt-out.
The many so-called controls turn out on closer inspection to be
useless. Permissions must be applied on a
On 19/07/2018 10:04 AM, Jim Birch wrote:
> I would have thought that the fundamental reason for centralised medical
> records is cost savings and better health care.
I agree. My Health Record isn't one of them, its a summary system that
required significant GP effort to input and interpret data.
rom: Link On Behalf Of Dr Bob Jansen (in
> Korea)
> Sent: Wednesday, 18 July 2018 3:02 PM
> To: link@mailman.anu.edu.au
> Subject: Re: [LINK] Urgent: MyHR Opt-Out
>
> Why not use a chip inside our Medicare card? We need it for treatment anyway
> so why not have a sy
On 18/07/18 10:37, David wrote:
... chronic condition which rendered them unable to talk about it in an
emergency situation. ...
In 2008 I was found on the floor of my office and taken to hospital by
ambulance. It would have been useful to have an electronic medical
record, but it would
I would have thought that the fundamental reason for centralised medical
records is cost savings and better health care.
It isn't just about you personally. It's the aggregate effects that a
government should be interested in, i.e. better value from health spending
(which if you haven't noticed
are my own and are not the official view of my
employer).
-Original Message-
From: Link On Behalf Of Dr Bob Jansen (in
Korea)
Sent: Wednesday, 18 July 2018 3:02 PM
To: link@mailman.anu.edu.au
Subject: Re: [LINK] Urgent: MyHR Opt-Out
Why not use a chip inside our Medicare card? We need
David,
The pin or access code needs only to be given to the current clinician and they
would use it for the duration of the current treatment. I assume that after a
few patients, the clinician would never remember the access codes for all.
I agree with your statement about the need though.
I
On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 15:01:58 AEST Dr Bob Jansen (in Korea) wrote:
> Why not use a chip inside our Medicare card? We need it for treatment anyway
> so why not have a system wherein the treating clinician uploads their notes
> or discharge summary into that chip. Then security is dependent
On 18/07/2018 3:01 PM, Dr Bob Jansen (in Korea) wrote:
Why not use a chip inside our Medicare card? We need it for treatment
anyway so why not have a system wherein the treating clinician uploads
their notes or discharge summary into that chip. Then security is
dependent on physical access
Why not use a chip inside our Medicare card? We need it for treatment
anyway so why not have a system wherein the treating clinician uploads
their notes or discharge summary into that chip. Then security is
dependent on physical access with presumably some sort of PIN/Biometric.
Chip can be
There's an ongoing discussion on the Consumer's Association site:
https://choice.community/t/myhealth-record-coming-to-us-like-it-or-not/15714/31
--
David Boxall| I have seen the past
da...@boxall.name | And it worked.
http://david.boxall.id.au |
On 18/07/2018 13:25, Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
And people can take photos of their meds, or cut up a bit of the box it
comes in and put it in their wallet or purse, or write it down.. And
you don't need the internet or computer skills.
And a lot safer than giving your data to the
On 16/07/2018 10:44 AM, Roger Clarke wrote:
The government is imposing a scheme called MyHR (My Health Record).
...
A comforting observation from Crikey:
The bureaucrat overseeing My Health Record presided over a disaster-plagued
national health record system in the UK, and has written
On 16/07/2018 10:44 AM, Roger Clarke wrote:
> This record is all-but useless for patient care. It's purpose is to enable
> government agencies to get access to people's health care data.
The only potential value I can see might relate to someone with a chronic
condition which rendered them
On 16/07/2018 10:44, Roger Clarke wrote:
Here's the information page provided by the Australian Privacy Foundation:
https://privacy.org.au/campaigns/myhr/
It contains a considerable amount of information that the government has failed
to communicate to the public.
Confidence level
Hey Russia, if you're listening, how about opting us all out?
---
--
kheit...@kheitman.com.www.kheitman.com
--
On 2018-07-16 10:33, Kim Holburn wrote:
> If you
The government is imposing a scheme called MyHR (My Health Record).
This record is all-but useless for patient care. It's purpose is to enable
government agencies to get access to people's health care data.
The project failed to attract people to opt-in, i.e. provide consent.
So the
26 matches
Mail list logo
