# Forum More Stuff Debate & Technical Discussion  Are you in or out?

## Bros

I'll give it a miss and opt out as you would have to put a lot of trust in Governments into the future to not water down access.  My Health Record opt-out period begins, but privacy concerns remain - Science News - ABC News

----------


## chrisp

I’ll probably stay ‘in’ but set up the sms notifications for any access to my records.

----------


## phild01

Turnbull wants so much of our personal information at reach, I'm out.

----------


## Bros

My experience with doctors especially specialists is that they are hopeless with computers and ask the receptionist to add documents to my record, I cant see it to be any different with the new system. 
I can just see me going to my doctor and before he starts I have to give him my password, that would be a fantastic start to any doctors visit.

----------


## Jon

Been In from the beginning. 
But my doctor doesn't like it and doesn't use it.

----------


## Bigboboz

Will probably opt out now.  Don't have any health issues that readily available records would be of use.  Will assess later if something comes up and see how the data security goes.

----------


## Marc

https://www.myhealthrecord.gov.au/fo...-health-record 
It's a bad idea, opt out. 
It was already rejected as a stupid idea by the AMA and the college of GP.
It is probably as stupid as the chip in your bank card that can be hacked from a distance. If you are one in 100,000 that has such complex health record that needs the emergency doctor to have access to it straight away, carry a memory stick with all your information on it and hang it from your neck. For the rest, don't expose yourself to the whim of politicians, police, bureaucrats, health insurance companies, work cover, green slip insurance, law firms and a dozen more.
The one thing you will not be able to opt out is the change in the definition of drug. next time you have an accident and you took a pain killer with codeine, don't be surprised if your insurance refuses to cover you and the police charges you with driving under the influence

----------


## METRIX

I have opted out, I don't like the idea of a "Healthcare Provider" having access to data that may have no relevance to them, such as your dentist's secretary..
The Healthcare Providers section is not disclosed as to who this actually is, so someone such as a Dentist, physio, Chiro is classified as a Healthcare Provider. 
Going by past gov't run schemes, I don't trust any information that may end up on there is safe from being hacked by whoever and being used for purposes it should not be used for, such as Health Insurance policies, Car insurance, green slip, etc etc, if the information is hacked in one form or another, it could be passed onto these other non healthcare companies and used against you for other paid services without you being aware of it. 
These types of systems always seem to end up being infiltrated by unscrupulous persons out to benefit themselves, insurance companies already try any excuse now up your policy.
I can see the information on this system will end up in their hands one way or another, only time will tell.

----------


## Bros

It’s a sneaky trick they are using as the health record is part of the on line MyGov but you have to choose to join but with the take up so low they turned it around and made it an opt out so by default you are in.

----------


## Marc

The "health record" has nothing tot do with health and everything to do with collecting data for the government. A patient record as it is today, can not be altered by the doctor or the patient. The electronic record is accessible by the patient and can be altered by him and any information he wants to hide can be erased by the patient. Does that sound like a health record to you? 
As we have opted out we have already provided free data. A link between the driver license and Medicare number that did not exist before.

----------


## phild01

All part of Malcolm's ideal world of Big Brother.  Didn't you notice the look on his face when the Census was going off the rails.

----------


## PhilT2

I'd like to think that the govt was concerned enough about me to want to collect information on me. But I suspect they couldn't give a rat's....

----------


## Marc

Concerned? A government that hired overseas mercenary to kill Australians in order to change the law so that we would be safer without semi automatic rifles?

----------


## chrisp

> Concerned? A government that hired overseas mercenary to kill Australians in order to change the law so that we would be safer without semi automatic rifles?

  Concerned? I’m very concerned! But my concern is about your paranoia.  :Smilie:

----------


## PhilT2

> Concerned? A government that hired overseas mercenary to kill Australians in order to change the law so that we would be safer without semi automatic rifles?

  Didn't you try to tell us it was a forum members brother that was responsible for Port Arthur last time ? Now it's an "overseas mercenary" Try and keep the conspiracy theories straight.

----------


## Marc

Not for a minute. The contracted killer was highly trained, most likely Mossad or similar organisation, not a small country cop. Martin Bryant has never seen the inside of a court and will never do, convicted on a confession from a mentally retarded with the promise of a TV set in his cell. Eventually the truth will come out, may be in 40 years.

----------


## Bros

> Not for a minute. The contracted killer was highly trained, most likely Mossad or similar organisation, not a small country cop. Martin Bryant has never seen the inside of a court and will never do, convicted on a confession from a mentally retarded with the promise of a TV set in his cell. Eventually the truth will come out, may be in 40 years.

  From opt in or out I am perplexed as to how the thread got off the rails so quick.

----------


## chrisp

> From opt in or out I am perplexed as to how the thread got off the rails so quick.

  It’s Marc’s ‘off the rails’ view of the world that did it!  :Smilie:

----------


## Marc

People are opting out from the "health record" because of mistrust in the government, their reasons behind it and the fact that no digital record on line is ever safe.
No one questions this "view of the world". The mistrust is within the socially accepted parameters. It fits people's views and accepted deviations from the norm. 
To accept that a government can hire a mercenary to shoot its own people to push a change in legislation is out there in most people views and no amount of evidence will make this facts palatable and therefore most people have their head comfortable in the sand or are quick to stick to the official recount and the many sworn accounts to the contrary despite the mountain of evidence against the fallacy that Martyn Bryant being left handed shot from the heap with his right hand dozen of one head shots. And many more you can find very easy if you look for it. 
Funny how so many are hell bent to say that vaccinations are bad for you and that the world is heating up when it is not and that sea water will reach 9 meters higher yet we have 100 years old records to say the do not etc etc.
So basically you make your own world. You believe what is within your area of comfort. An orchestrated shooting in PA is not within most people comfort zone so denying is the way to survive. 
Each to his own I suppose.

----------


## Uncle Bob

I'll be opting out. It's just more information for them to stuff into the dossier that the powers that be are creating on us (and I'm not just talking about our useless government). You know the dossier, the one that's over flowing with all your browsing/spending/social media and any other personal data they can glean.

----------


## phild01

The Borg wants us in their collective :Cry:

----------


## Uncle Bob

Well if there's more drones like seven of nine, maybe I should opt in  :Smilie:

----------


## phild01

oooh, yeah! :Biggrin:

----------


## Bros

> People are opting out from the "health record" because of mistrust in the government, their reasons behind it and the fact that no digital record on line is ever safe.

   

> Each to his own I suppose.

  Yep agree with the above two sentences.

----------


## Bigboboz

I'm out

----------


## Marc

If you look at this database objectively, you must ask yourself ... who does it serve? 
According to doctors, a database that is open to be edited by the patient is absolutely useless. Basically it will contain what the patient wants to show and hide what the patient wants to hide. 
Then, you have the perpetuation of errors and misdiagnosis recorded there forever, unless you do your own clean up in ignorance.  
The case of the lady that was deaf and was admitted to hospital for a fall, assessed in 3 minutes by the local resident and diagnosed with Alzheimers, comes to mind. Despite being as sharp as a tack, she passed away 10 years later, sporting the diagnose of dementia in her death certificate. 
It is a lose lose situation.  
The minuscule proportion of the population that has some dangerous health problem that can take them to the emergency and need the doctors to know what they are dealing with whilst they are unconscious, do not warrant to build a database that contains 100% of the population for this. Encourage those 0.01% of people to hang a memory stick from their neck or write it on a wrist band.  
Those who land in the emergency with some socially unacceptable ailment will have diligently clean up their electronic health record and leave the doctors in the dark anyway. 
Unless of course there is an undisclosed parallel agenda that will benefit from such database.

----------


## Jon

But there is the opposite side of the coin Marc.
Those who are dealing with multiple or chronic issues and who need to recount their medical history to every new medical practitioner they encounter.
Look it like the log book or the service history of your car.

----------


## Bros

One thing that I can’t understand is governments do things with one eye on being re-elected but I can’t see the reason behind this compulsory medical record.

----------


## Marc

> But there is the opposite side of the coin Marc.
> Those who are dealing with multiple or chronic issues and who need to recount their medical history to every new medical practitioner they encounter.
> Look it like the log book or the service history of your car.

   Valid in theory, but too many drawbacks. Keep it between your doctor (singular) and you. When you need a referral to a specialist they will talk among them, and the same goes for the hospital.
 A GP takes an inordinate time on the phone to liaise with colleagues. An anonymous multi authored database exposed to hacking and editing is not the answer.

----------


## John2b

> It's a bad idea, opt out. 
> It was already rejected as a stupid idea by the AMA and the college of GP.
> It is probably as stupid as the chip in your bank card that can be hacked from a distance. If you are one in 100,000 that has such complex health record that needs the emergency doctor to have access to it straight away, carry a memory stick with all your information on it and hang it from your neck. For the rest, don't expose yourself to the whim of politicians, police, bureaucrats, health insurance companies, work cover, green slip insurance, law firms and a dozen more.

  Spot on Marc! As far as I can tell there is no way to make the health record data easily available to people who can make use of it without also making the records accessible (directly or indirectly) to others who can and will use it in ways not intended and possibly detrimental to the owner of the data. Everybody should look after their future health and happiness by opting out.

----------

