It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Originally posted by leftystrat
Which part of electronic medical records sounds good to people?
Probably the part where most computers containing medical records are connected to a hospital-specific inTRAnet, not inTERnet. Big difference.
Originally posted by leftystrat
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Originally posted by leftystrat
Which part of electronic medical records sounds good to people?
Probably the part where most computers containing medical records are connected to a hospital-specific inTRAnet, not inTERnet. Big difference.
They'll not only get hacked, they'll be used against you for marketing and insurance.
(moreso)
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Hacking a hospital's intranet would be the equivalent of snatching a stack of charts of the nurses' station. Sure, it's possible, I suppose, but the likelihood very low, as it's not worth the risk. If an insurance company were caught using that information to affect rates, they would be raked over the coals. In fact, in the last ten years, we have passed at least oen bill preventing any information gleaned from a genetic test from affecting insurance in any way.
Next irrational fear?
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
I spent about ten years looking for what was wrong with me.. not only having to fight the disease but fighting the charactor missinformation written in my records. I could not find a doctor to give me a genuine 2nd or 3rd opinion as they'd read what had been written about me previously, take all my opinions with a gran of salt and dismiss them.
It never crossed your mind that they agreed with the first opinion?
A doctor CAN perform any test you or they like, assuming the patient is willing to pay for it out of pocket. Most doctors are reluctant to do random and extraneous tests because insurance companies will not pay for it, not because the doctor is out to get you.
I knew tests for her to do as I had to study for myself as no doctor would help me. My point is if they had've believed me in the first place my disease would not have advanced so far and I could've had it treated earlier with less permament damage. Why wasn't it?
Because doctors are humans, too. Some diseases are remarkably hard to detect. I'm very glad you were able to get the tests taken care of and start therapy.
However, I would be very curious as to whether you went to several family practitioners, or if you went to a specialist?
because some ignorant doctor couldn't find out what was wrong with me and instead of recognising his own failings and referring me to a specialist he arrogently decided it was all in my head and wrote it down for all future doctors to read.
Did you try the treatment that doctor offered?
It's called "combative patient appeasement" and we all learn it in medical school. If you have a history of stonewalling us, then you ask for something that won't hurt you, then why nto just let you have it so you'll be happy and more likely to follow our treatment?
Originally posted by riley
Yes it did.. which means that they were also miss-diganosing me. I doubt that occured to you when you asked me that.. I believe they read the doctors previous notes and took those into account when assessing me.
When they fail to find a disagnosis and just decide the patient has nothing wrong with them that is malpractice. They should keep looking.
The tests I asked for were not random or extraneous either.. the symptoms were there to follow up. I also did end up paying for them myself which costs me a small fortune but it was worth it.
Before a doctor sends someone to a specialist they need to pinpoint a specialty. I had to study this myself before I could tell them where to send me. I should not have had to that is the doctors job.
Are you kidding? I had already said this occured over TEN YEARS so of course I did! Your question is full of assumptions.. otherwise you would not have asked it.
I was NOT stone walling them and resent the insinuation.
My actions proved their diagnosis wrong and they were probably afraid of getting sued.
I did indeed try it their way and it almost killed me (didn't I already say that..?) and I ended up having to bully the doctor into tests which turned out to reveal exactly what the medical problem was. Their treatment of giving me drugs I did not need or sending me home to wait it out till next time did nothing apart from making it worse.
Do not ask me to reveal anymore private medical information. I shared my story and you just asked me (indirectly) to prove it wasn't my own fault.
[edit on 19-1-2010 by riley]
Originally posted by leftystrat
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Hacking a hospital's intranet would be the equivalent of snatching a stack of charts of the nurses' station. Sure, it's possible, I suppose, but the likelihood very low, as it's not worth the risk. If an insurance company were caught using that information to affect rates, they would be raked over the coals. In fact, in the last ten years, we have passed at least oen bill preventing any information gleaned from a genetic test from affecting insurance in any way.
Next irrational fear?
Don't be rude - it's not becoming.
It will not be one hospital. Targets get hacked for a variety of reasons. Weekly we read about network security breaches. If you consolidate data like this, it will bite you in the buttocks.
Glad to hear we're attempting legislation. Just remember who has the deeper pockets.
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
Originally posted by riley
Yes it did.. which means that they were also miss-diganosing me. I doubt that occured to you when you asked me that.. I believe they read the doctors previous notes and took those into account when assessing me.
It's certainly possible that a misdiagnosis was made (it wouldn't be the first time).
I'm still curious as to why the physicians were so certain they had nailed the diagnosis to the point that you were coming to them for ten years with no improvement, despite therapy, and without trying other treatments. This is what makes me think there is more to this story, which you aren't sharing.
When they fail to find a disagnosis and just decide the patient has nothing wrong with them that is malpractice. They should keep looking.
Well, now you've changed your story. Was it a misdiagnosis or NO diagnosis?
I do not have to justify myself to you and do not appreciate being accused of lieing. I was just sharing my experiences in regard to the OP and my response was sufficent and I did not feel comfortable going into further detail. Do NOT start trying to find holes in my story. For me to answer your questions would mean going in to personal specifics and great detail about my private medical business which I am not willing to do to some random guy on a PUBLIC internet forum.
I don't care if you are a doctor.. you might be a quack. I could start indirectly asking if you've ever been found negligent but for me to start interrogating YOU over YOUR personal history and to demand you start posting personal information in order to prove your own inncocence would be very innapropriate and insulting yet that is bascially what you have done to me. Understand? Do not ask me to devuldge more about my private medical business it is not relevent to the OP.
[edit on 20-1-2010 by riley]
Originally posted by ANNED
some of the doctor shorthand i have seen.
[snip]
CLL - chronic Low Life
COPD - Chronic Old Persons Disease (unwell, no specific cause)
[snip]