Quote from: Solars Toy on October 17, 2010, 04:51:03 PM
I would give it to you if I could....just remember I want my perks. ;D ;D ;D

We'll bill the patients a $15 "EMR fee" and split that! 

Quote from: arpad on October 16, 2010, 05:27:17 PM
What "highly expensive central planning boondoggle"?

Electronic medical records are long past due. They'd help cut the cost of medicine, make medical practice safer and more effective. In fact, I'm of the opinion that it's governmental interference in the medical industry that's slowed the use of electronic medical records.

So what exactly are you referring too?

As is now, not even close.  A private sector solution, yes.

Quote from: quiller on October 17, 2010, 05:23:59 AM
Imagine how fast a candidate's history of psychiatric counseling would surface, the fewer safeguards there are.

If you want a curious doctor's receptionist pawing through your record, or an insurance company selling data to, say, a pharmaceutical company in search of test subjects for a given malady, then consolidated on-line records are OK.

I prefer medical privacy.

In my world, records would be encrypted with bio-metric keys, or, a key only doctors would have....   many possible options that would be FAR more secure than what we have now.

Quote from: walkstall on October 17, 2010, 09:27:36 AM
There are always one or two back door into everything.   >:D

Not with my encryption algorithm.

Taxed, if you were in charge then I could get a lot more optimistic about the process. Unfortunately that's not the case and what we have is unworkable.

Quote from: Dan on October 17, 2010, 05:12:07 PM
Taxed, if you were in charge then I could get a lot more optimistic about the process. Unfortunately that's not the case and what we have is unworkable.

I agree with you.

There's no benefit without a cost but on balance I'd say we're a heck of a lot better off with the technological bargains we've made then we were without them.

If medical privacy is more vulnerable then we get better, faster, more effective treatment and faster-advancing medical knowledge. Like I wrote above, I think the reason we don't have a lot more in the way of electronic medical record-keeping is the degree of government interference in the market. Were it not for ERISA, Medicare and the other intrusions of government the pressure would've been greater to find ways to cut costs while improving service as is the case throughout the private sphere. But with Uncle Sam's bottomless wallet to tap in to, and the ever-changing rules and regulations, recording-keeping wasn't under the pressure to become less costly and more productive it would've been in a free market.