Consumer Watchdog Thinks Google Is Really Greedy or Foolish or Both
I appreciate good rumors and conspiracy theories as much as the next journalist but some of them are head scratchers. Privacy rights group Consumer Watchdog believes that Google is supporting a lobbying effort that OKs the sale of electronic medical records so that it can sell these to advertisers on its new Google Health service. Google Health is a personal health portal where users can store and easily access their medical records. The concern thinks Google is working politicos to augment the current economic stimulus package, so the group appealed to "Congress to remove loopholes in the ban on the sale of medical records and include other privacy protections absent from the current bill." Accusing Google of hawking health records for financial gain is an incredibly strong allegation and unfortunately the Consumer Watchdog does not cite evidence, does not even provide a link to a blog post or article about this. Of course, when you make an evil allegation of corporate greed about a company whose motto is "don't be evil," you're going to get a response, which for Google is an emphatic "your full of it and you have no proof." What Google Senior Policy Counsel Pablo Chavez really wrote in a blog post was:
This claim -- based on no evidence whatsoever -- is 100 percent false and unfounded. Google does not sell health data. In fact, one of our most steadfast privacy principles is that we don't sell our users' personal data, whether it's stored in Google Health, Gmail, or in any of our products. And from a policy perspective, we oppose the sale of medical information in the health care industry. Chavez could not have been plainer on that and goes on to say that Google supports strong privacy protections for medical records and that consumers own their electronic medical data. And now, a word on the issue. Selling health records for financial gain is wrong on so many levels, legally, morally and ethically. Google would have to either be really desperate for cash, which at $15.85 billion in cash flow as of the latest earnings report it's clearly not, or really stupid because such an effort would be tantamount to corporate suicide. And we know that Google is loaded with smart people. What some pundits don't get is that while, yes, Google has become this grand moneymaking machine and is seeking to gather more data on users to improve its search and display advertising prospects, the company is also not going to risk irretrievably breaking the public's trust. It's already hedging its bets on those fronts if you look at how the government struck down it's deal with Yahoo with authority. It's impossible for a search and Web service provider to grow as large as Google and not inspire some distrust for the data it does collect. But to suggest that Google would do something that would shatter consumer confidence in it for good assumes that Google has gotten so arrogant as to feel it can take risks that will tick consumers off. The government is already suspicious of Google for gross privacy infringement because of the search log data and advertising practices. Why fan those flames? Neither the public nor the government would brook such trespass. Google may weather the recession better than anyone else, but it's not in the position to abuse the public's health records without severe recrimination. Most people who follow Google know this and believe it to be true, which is why I think Consumer Watchdog has fallen prey to the poison being poured into its ears. Are the folks at the big Redmond machine playing the role of King Claudius? |
Comments (7)
Yes, perhaps Google denounces selling health information, but they could eventually do it if they wanted to. If they were offered enough money, they could compromise their principles.
As Shakespeare used to say, "He doth protest too much, methinks." Google's strongly worded refutation to the allegation that they will try to sell health information is not enough to placate me, for one.
If the AMA can sell doctors' prescribing records to the drug companies, Google could sell health information to companies for money.
This is what happens when third parties become caretakers of the medical record. Right now, doctors take care of the medical record.
We already lost control over the payment process to third parties--now we are about to lose control of our precious charts to third parties.
Posted by InteractMD.com | January 28, 2009 2:29 PM
Anyone who thinks Google is a benevolent company is not very bright. Google is a money grabbing group of propeller heads who want to have the world revolve around their internet ecosystem.
Google is an evil corporate empire that is poorly managed in all activities outside of paid search.
Posted by James | January 28, 2009 2:54 PM
I don't know about ya'll but I trust Google, heck if they made the OS on my computer perhaps it might run better. More over maybe Google can fix the Health Care crisis. Lets elect Eric the CEO of Google to President of the USA.
My thoughts I could be wrong,
AyreWolf
Posted by Patrick Montgomery | January 28, 2009 3:47 PM
I don't think Google would sell the information outright, but I do believe that they would use it to their advantage to drive advertising for pharmaceutical companies (why sell it when they can monopolize it). The general demographics that they could obtain by grouping those records together could be quite valuable. From what I can see, Google has no problem doing that sort of thing. The issue is that one thing leads to another and after a while they’ve crossed a line. I don’t give Google any more information than I have to.
Bill
Posted by Bill Locke | January 29, 2009 10:00 AM
InteractMD.com's comments are misinformed on so many levels that it is difficult to know where to begin.
S/he first asserts that, DESPITE GOOGLE'S PLAIN STATEMENT TO THE CONTRARY, Google "could eventually [sell health information] if they wanted to." This is not the same as Nixon's famous declamation that "I am not a crook" or George H.W. Bush's "no new taxes" pledge. There is absolutely no evidence that Google has that intention. And then InteractMD.com goes on to say that "This is what happens when third parties become caretakers of the medical record." -- as if it is already occurring that Google is selling health information. I see no similar dismay with medical information stored using Microsoft HealthVault being at risk.
I agree with many privacy advocates, and with many members of the AMA itself, that their practice of selling prescription information -- which, incidentally, is not patient-identifiable -- is morally suspect. The AMA claims it is an important source of revenue for them.
Evidently it has been a long time since InteractMD.com has visited a health care facility. Otherwise it would be obvious that doctors DO NOT "take care of the medical record." In hospitals, a separate department is devoted to the collection and archiving of medical records, as is also common in large multi-practitioner clinics. Each doctor does not have piles of charts hidden away in locked file cabinets. These centralized medical records may be paper, electronic, or some combination. And any chain pharmacy at which you fill your prescriptions has a complete medication history, from which a great deal about a patient's clinical conditions can be inferred.
The alternative to relinquishing "control over the payment process to third parties" is to pay our own medical bills with our own money. Most people participate in various forms of health insurance to avoid the potential for being personally at risk for sometimes enormous financial obligations. As part of that process, the payors have pretty much carte blanche to examine and retain any portion of the medical record they deem relevant to the payment process. And most payors maintain a vigorous audit department which examines medical records onsite to support the facility's or practitioner's submitted billings. So we have already lost "control of our precious charts" to these "third parties".
And poor James...
Would he claim that Microsoft is NOT "a money grabbing group of propeller heads who want to have the world revolve around their [software] ecosystem" (i.e., Windows/Office/Internet Explorer/Media Player)? Must be a MS fanboy. The same could be said of Oracle, Cisco, AT&T, or any number of other technology companies.
Posted by Stratocaster | January 29, 2009 6:14 PM
Rumors aside, Big Brother Google's primary business is the collection of personal information for advertising purposes. I have no interest in giving them access to my medical records.
Posted by JohnJ | January 29, 2009 9:02 PM
I put my medical information on google. It is amazing that success brings so much animosity!! They can make money in so many ways from medical records without sharing it with outside, e.g. showing you ads about some medication that you take without sharing it the manufacturer.
Keeping your medical information is just another line of business, in reality nothing can be kept secret. They already read your emails, government publicizes the fact they monitor everything. So keeping you medical records private is just a myth, however google won't sell it to anyone, they just leverage it internally and also think of all the integration potentials with pharmacy chains and medical providers, once they are sucked in then google can help them with other future medical applications, so sky is the limit.
Posted by Peyman Mohajerian | February 15, 2009 7:38 PM