Medical Record Privacy Fails : Progams Accessible to Outside Agents

It's interesting that ObamaCare has the same problem, little or no security to protect the identity and records of those that sign up for medical insurance. If someone is to understand why this occurs in most government run programs, it stands to reason it must be part of the intended program to allow records to be easily accessible to outside agents

I know, many will say this is over the top, but when nearly every program has a history of cyber attacks, successfully I might add, what other conclusion can one come to that the failure to secure the sites is intentional . But why would the designers intentional allow access?

Well, given what the progressive socialist democrats have shown us in the past six years with the attacks on the Tea Party groups with the IRS, DOJ and the FBI, (even the FBI?) let alone what the NSA has done to the information that they have gotten from their attacks and the information that was willingly given them for their data banks from the IRS demands on the Tea Party groups, just imagine what the progressives can do with the medical records of every individual in the country, especially targeted groups? Republicans? Conservatives? Anyone they believe might stand in their way for total control.

Still think this is over the top? Remember the motto of the progressives, 'by any means necessary' to gain control and power. If one chooses to ignore the true intent of the progressive liberal lift democrats, and this is to do what is necessary no matter the consequences to the population, then do so at your own risk.

But by falling asleep to the intent of the democrats and voting for their agenda that cripples the nation with progressive socialism, those voters are also dragging the rest of us down with them into political and domestic chaos.

How Shifting to Electronic Records Has Endangered Patient Privacy
Source: Christina England and Josh Archambault, "How the Shift from Paper to Electronic Health Records Has Endangered Patient Privacy and Security and How to Calm the Flame," Pioneer Institute, January 2014.
February 12, 2014

Policymakers should adopt privacy measures to protect patients from potential problems with electronic health records, say Christina England and Josh Archambault of the Pioneer Institute.
Electronic Health Records (EHRs) are one of the modern developments in health information technology (HIT), with 72 percent of doctors having some sort of EHR system. In short, EHRs are technological systems that allow providers to store and share medical information with the intended goals of reducing errors, saving money and increasing efficiency. State and federal governments have encouraged the use of EHRs, with Massachusetts being the most prominent promoter.

However, this increase in the use of electronic records has not come with much of a corresponding discussion of privacy and security issues, despite potential problems.

• An April 2013 report from a group of senators cited the Inspector General of Health and Human Services' concern that both the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services security policies were "lax and may jeopardize sensitive patient data."
• Not only do EHRs contain private medical data, but they provide a substantial amount of personal information that could be used by identity thieves, including financial information. In 2009, one out of every six data breaches was targeted at the health care industry.
• Medical identity theft is also used to file false medical claims with another person's insurance, which leads to serious problems for the actual beneficiary in obtaining prescriptions and care. Moreover, beneficiaries have been incorrectly labeled as having diabetes, for example, when diabetics have stolen their medical identity and obtained services for such a condition.
• Selling a credit card on the black market that includes a health care identity profile increases the value of the card up to 20 times more.
• Evidence has emerged that "de-identification" mechanisms -- processes that are intended to secure medical data and keep it anonymous -- are not at all sufficient, allowing people to identify supposedly anonymous medical records with ease.

Using electronic networks is always going to carry a security risk, and steps must be taken to deal with the problem. The number of individuals with access to these records should be limited, and patients, not governments, should have more control over who can access their personal data. As technology advances, privacy and security concerns must be continually readdressed.