On Tue, April 24, 2007 9:10 am, Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade wrote: > On Apr 24, 2007, at 5:37 AM, Todd Walton wrote: > >> On 4/20/07, Gregory K. Ruiz-Ade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> There are good, legitimate reasons for having all your medical >>> information in one place. >> >> There's meaning drift here. I agree that there are good reasons for >> having all of any one person's medical information in one place. But >> I don't think there's a good reason to have it in the same place as >> yours and Joe's and Susan's and the President's. > > If you're traveling cross-country and get hit by a car crossing the > street, it might be a good idea for your doctors to know you're > allergic to, say, commonly used pain medication. > > Granted, a limited amount of information can be present on engraved > medical bracelets, but how much of your medical history do you want > engraved on metal and wrapped around your wrist? > > Also, you'd be screwed if the 'Net were having issues, or the power > was out. > > I'd simply like to point out that _I_ would like any doctor that > needs to treat me to have access to my medical history, but I agree > in that having it in an online form presents too much risk. > > Gregory
Actually, I'm with Todd on this. The potential medical benefit from a centralized medical data base is insignificant when compared with the potential for abuse, and in Bush world we should all realize that all potential for abuse eventually gets actualized. What Greg is citing can be covered quite nicely with a med alert bracelet. Besides, even if you go to your usual hospital, no ER physician is goinfg to pull your chart in an emergency. Karl Rove, OTOH, will pull anyone's chart if he wants to get some dirt on him. I think a centralized data base of medical information properly anonymized would be a boon to research. -- Lan Barnes SCM Analyst Linux Guy Tcl/Tk Enthusiast Biodiesel Brewer -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
