From: Rich Graves <llurch@networking.stanford.edu>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 11:53:17 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: "Utilization Review"
In-Reply-To: <199608192029.NAA28776@netcom8.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GUL.3.95.960819174621.2971G-100000@Networking.Stanford.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Mon, 19 Aug 1996, Bill Frantz wrote:

> At 12:22 AM 8/19/96 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote:
> >I listened with horror this evening to a radio program which 
> >discussed the state of medical record privacy today.
> 
> Unfortunatly, it is still true that whoever pays the piper calls the tune. 
> The best way to ensure medical record privacy is to eliminate medical
> insurance.

Or even better: don't get sick.

> Perhaps, within our current social order, medical savings plans
> are the best option on the table.

What alternative social orders can you envision that would handle this
problem elegantly? I can't think of any off the top of my head. 

Medical savings plans do not work for anyone but the extremely rich and
healthy, because few normal people can self-insure to cover the risk. With
pooled risk, the prospective customer has the right to know the risks
already in the pool before diving in. Contracts based on infinite
uncertaintly tend not to work.

There's also the little matter of letting your doctor know your medical
history. That data needs to be stored somewhere in clear text (as respects
my lack of involvement in the release, that is). If I'm unconscious, I can't
tell them my passphrase. 

-rich