lbhnact

I'd suggest working with one hospital to demo and test the idea first in their local environment. Getting buy in from multiple hospitals to try an idea out on an infrastructure you have not yet created is unlikely to be successful, unless there is a very clear ROI that you can model for them.

I would recommend Aptible for a simple HIPAA compliant app dev environment. They are fast and professional.

If you need integration-as-a-service and have some kind of budget, I would call Catalyze or my company, Fleet.

This is true. Once buy-in is achieved then IT will generally do what they need.

Well, like usual on HN I don't read the actual linked content and probably won't here as well. For my own peace of mind, I'll recuse myself from reading the website and it's likely necessary launch rhetoric. You're right that HN suffers from less than rigorous medical analysis more often than I would usually like, but there are usually at least a few penetrating questions on the medical threads I read.

However, I have met Tim before and can attest to his interpersonal candor on problems with EMS, and the reputation for rigor of his medical training. In short, I think he's a smart, hard working guy who is legitimately committed to solving a real problem.

Given my own experience (as an EMT, working in the ED as an admin and medical student, and as a federal emergency response officer in a previous life), I do think solutions along the lines of higher fidelity information on scene will be useful for patients and providers.

There will need to be piles and piles of evidence before we can conclude that products like this will provide the outcomes we want in our health system. In the meantime, I'll try to appreciate the obstacles I know this team has overcome to get as far as they have.

Hi Tim, congrats on the launch from back here in Boston! I had a couple of questions on what I'll call 'sensitivity' and 'specificity' in your early work:

Sensitivity: What's the OR, relative delta, or NNT in calls for changing prehospital acuity or intervention to a higher than initially suspected level?

Specificity: How often does the early contact result in a less intense, on-site, or diverted response?

So many questions! Would love to hear what you're finding.

(edit: copy)

Poignant example. Life use to be much, much less easy.

Excellent link as well, thanks.

Man I really hope someone out there has streamed Spotify or NPR over this. Recurs-inception.

Felt the need to remind you whippersnappers about Bo Jackson!

I'd also argue that the skills needed for multilanguage competency as a programmer aren't as mutually exclusive as some of the physical traits needed for pro-level athletic talent.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_Jackson [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multi-sport_athletes

Excellent salient story, thank you. I'm a former public servant, and it's really nice to see someone share a story here showing that the 'nameless government bureaucrats', so often derided by the programmer community, can actually care a whole hell of a lot about their jobs when they feel like they're making a difference.

Being friendly with a few full-time computational and bench geneticists, I can tell you that none of them say things like "Epigentics has shown us that..." with great confidence, much less make sweeping claims about multi-generational heritable traits and clear cut environmental determinants.

I was referring to academics specifically. While I agree 'bad' isn't an unfair way to feel about the market, I would say it's because expectations have been set by boomer mentors (in their 50s and 60s) that graduated into a job market that was expanding and could absorb them.

Now we have hit equilibrium, and there isn't demand for people who study Foucault, Jung, or build a career around authors from 1850-1950 anymore. The gig is up, and graduating from anything other than a the most famous names just want get you a job anymore.

Not 'good' or 'bad', but certainly 'is', for better or worse.

Just want to point out that the job market is not neccisarily 'bad'. There was a huge period of growth in the post WWII era as the university ecosystem expanded with the economy, continuing along later with the boomers' expectation that their children do as they did. Now we live in a post-boomer, globalized economy where the low hanging fruit has all been plucked.

That's not 'bad', more likely just the new normal.

Yeah, people forget that the operating systems that run the world are written in C/C++. C underlies everything.

This partly true, though HIPAA is more of a burden because of people's misunderstanding of it than what it actually mandates.

However, I posit that it is a lack of government regulation that has allowed health IT vendors to take no responsibility for supporting standards that enable data sharing across care settings. Every person in ill health deserves better study and care than we currently provide.

These problems are indeed well understood by some of us in healthcare, the details of a US 'Interoperability Roadmap' are available at the below link. Please take a moment to see where we are now, where we are headed, and how you might contribute.

http://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/files/nationwide-inter...

It bears pointing out some inaccuracy in language here, notably that 'types' and 'cases' are not the same thing.

Most 'types' of cancer are unequivocally about bad luck; nearly any cell line in your body can develop overproliferative mutations. There are hundreds of 'types' of cancer.

'Cases' and deaths from cancer are, globally and in the US, more environmentally influenced, because of the huge impact of smoking on lung and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in particular.