Surely they could have come up with a less alarmist headline for what seems like a much needed initiative in healthcare innovation.
But that's the case for all tech coverage nowadays.
But that's the case for all tech coverage nowadays.
Without restraint, these efforts will undeniably bolster their ability to conduct targeted advertisements, which is bad. Hopefully regulation and consumer backlash will take care of that.
But you cannot deny the amount of good we stand to gain from an advanced electronic health system. The insights that can be generated from cross correlation of all patient data, the amount of preventative measures that can be taken from detecting problems before they become bigger problems... The benefits far outweigh the negatives. It's unthinkable to have all this data and NOT attempt to find insights in them.
Not one that has anything to do with Google though.
I'd like to think that Google is concerned about more than just profit, but they prove again (censored search for China) and again (YouTube policy changes) and again that they are not. Profit rules Google's decisions.
And that is why there's such backlash against Google getting this data. Because the chances of anything good for us as patients is slim to non-existent.
And there is nothing wrong about monetary profit as motivation, the pursuit of profits has elevated the living standards of billions around the world saving countless lives.
Profit itself is a dangerous motivation. Profit tempered by morals is what will improve lives. Google is showing that their drive for profits is not being tempered by morals.
The healthcare systems they are collaborating with (e.g. Mayo) are strongly motivated to improve health of their patients, particularly in capitated models like accountable care organizations. Mayo is actually pretty famous for adopting the ACO model. Note the author on this article (1) from Mayo Clinic Proceedings is by David Shulkin, who went on to become the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
You may also be interested to know Ascension is another ACO (2).
So why would an ACO be motivated to work with Google? Because they know reducing diagnostic variance is almost certainly identical to improving quality of diagnosis, which will reduce poor outcomes and reduce malpractice, cost of overtreatment, cost of undertreatment, and so on.
(1) https://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196(12)...
(2) https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/acos-to-know-2019.html
Do we have any assurances that Google's efforts will be limited to improving care? Or are they being compensated by being able to use that data in other opportunities?
In terms of business actions, lets look at the NHS brew-haha. Hard to blame Google for NHS screwing up the research protocol that led to the specific 1.6M patient records being transferred to Deep Mind. And they corrected the research process years ago. They passed muster with Mayo (a deal that no doubt had to pass muster with Shulkin among other world-renown physicians and administrators). They have deals with McKesson, Cleveland Clinic, and now Ascension. These are major players.
Their leadership choices give you additional insight on their motives. Their new Chief Health Officer is Karen DeSalvo, former National Coordinator for Health IT and Acting Assistant Secretary of HHS (and no doubt candidate for next Secretary of HHS). David Feinberg, their new VP for Health, is coming from serving as CEO of Geisinger and UCLA prior to that. These people are reputationally allergic to mixing medicine with adtech.
Edit: It basically doesn't matter what procedure Google's algorithm says you should get. If your insurance doesn't want to cover it, you're not getting it.
Ethics != law. Just because it's lawful doesn't mean it's ethical or that we shouldn't be outraged.
Edit: > The hope is that any breakthrough might lower healthcare costs
Perhaps then Google should instead lobby hard for single-payer. Most countries with a single-payer systems have lower health care costs than the US. It's a proven solution that will lower costs, not a "hope".