Whatever you may think of Dr. Robert Malone, I have been availed a lot of good information by subscribing to his Substack email list, and I encourage everyone interested in being well informed to do so, which you can do at the link provided.
Like many similar institutions my local county health department uses My Chart to facilitate communications between that institution, it's providers, and it's clients. I have found it to be a noxious and unwieldy application and have refused to use it, but the health department still does publish my medical information on it, despite this.
I am going to demand they stop. It's very likely extremely insecure, as much garbage code is, and that doesn't even matter if they are intentionally availing social media corporations my sensitive and personally identifiable medical information. According to my understanding of HIPAA, which I believe is federal law, that information is protected and should only be available to me and my medical providers, with insurers availed only that necessary for billing purposes.
Feeding it to Meta is a crime. Frankly, the whole vaccine passport scheme has violated this principle, and even if some rhetoric somewhere has tried to make it legal I strongly oppose anyone from acquiring my sensitive medical information from any source besides myself.
I encourage everyone to ascertain if some of their medical providers use My Chart and thereby violate their privacy by feeding their medical information to Fakebook. If your privacy is being compromised in this way, I encourage you to take every lawful action possible to discourage that from happening, and to seek redress in every way available to you.
Nothing good can come of Zuckerborg and the corporate vermin seeking to enslave us all of gaining this power over us having our sensitive medical information avails them.
From Dr. Robert Malone's Substack email:
"Medical Privacy and Sexual Identity
"Real investigative journalism not covered by corporate legacy media
"Robert W Malone MD, MS
"Jun 21
"Facebook Is Receiving Sensitive Medical Information from Hospital Websites
Experts say some hospitals’ use of an ad tracking tool may violate a federal law protecting health information
"Published in “The Markup”
"By Todd Feathers, Simon Fondrie-Teitler, Angie Waller, and Surya Mattu
"An article entitled: Facebook Is Receiving Sensitive Medical Information from Hospital Websites is one of the more shocking investigative pieces of the week to not make main-stream corporate media. The authors document how there has been a tracking tool installed on many hospitals’ private website pages, which have been collecting patients’ health information. This includes medical conditions, prescriptions, and doctor’s appointments. This tool is then sending all that data to Facebook/Meta. The authors found this tool was installed in 33 out of 100 of the top hospitals in the USA and on seven major medical systems, including “My Chart.” This means that a large percentage of hospitals have been directly sending patient data to Facebook (or Meta).
"The 33 hospitals The Markup found sending patient appointment details to Facebook collectively reported more than 26 million patient admissions and outpatient visits in 2020.
"To be clear, this is just the 33 hospitals that The Markup tested… Not the hospital systems or the vast majority of hospital and doctor’s offices who use these large cloud based or networked software systems in the USA.
"In reading this, I was struck that patients should demand that their data not be entered into such systems. That a movement to return to data entry systems that are not corrupted by Meta, Facebook or Google needs to be jump-started.
"As late as 2017, the government was actually worried about medical systems being hacked. But now? Where is our government in protecting patient’s rights?
"Clearly, “we” the people can not rely on the US government. Therefore, we have to protect ourselves. Our doctors and hospitals are being encouraged to buy cloud-based, soft-ware solutions to “protect us.” These medical providers also need to be educated - these large cloud systems-based solutions have been corrupted. The medical providers must understand that patients should be given a choice to opt-out of the system. The right to privacy extends to healthcare in its entirety."
"The 33 hospitals The Markup found sending patient appointment details to Facebook collectively reported more than 26 million patient admissions and outpatient visits in 2020."
"The authors document how there has been a tracking tool installed on many hospitals’ private website pages, which have been collecting patients’ health information. This includes medical conditions, prescriptions, and doctor’s appointments."
Legally they can do that. There's nothing that stops a hospital from giving out how many admissions or outpatient visit stats. They can give out how many people were there because they had a stroke, fell and injured themselves, car accident, etc., they can list what prescriptions they prescribe daily, weekly, monthly even but what they can't do is give out who that information involved, in other words any personally identifiable information.
It wouldn't or doesn't surprise me the health department has that information either as they are funded by the government for programs that help reduce or offer programs in area's prone for higher rates or incidences of certain diseases. I am sure the CDC has a tracker also as you can go to their site and look up the data on just about anything. Again, letting the information highway collect that data is not the same as giving out personally identifiable information it just makes it an efficient way to collect data that'd otherwise take years to track. Yes there is nothing stopping them from making money off letting FB and Google gather stats either, it's perfectly legal as long as they don't give out your personal info.
Doesn't surprise me ol' Bob needed something to write about, appears he's finally found a hitch that's profitable for him because sticking peanut butter in some chocolate didn't work out to well for him.
My Chart doesn't aggregate this information. It's supposed to be a communications vehicle for patient/provider private information specifically personally identifiable. My prescriptions. My appointments, and my conditions.
The Markup collected the information reported. That's where it was collectivized. My Chart only has PII.
The Markup collected non personal information otherwise they'd said, and it would have made national headlines, we used the same tracking method and obtained the appointment times of "X" number of individuals that included their names, diagnosis, treatment and prescriptions. It wasn't described that way because nothing illegal happened. So unless your name is "My" you have nothing to worry about.
You seem to be deliberately denying that the information collected by The Markup was 'medical conditions, prescriptions, and doctor’s appointments.' That's why they published the article at all. Aggregate information is not newsworthy at all.
PII being sent to Fakebook is what they report.
The national headlines are notoriously averse to reporting on the collection of surveillance data, and it is understandable that the wholly owned assets of the people doing the surveilling would not tell us about it. They also make all kinds of false claims, such as the the Jan. 6 protest was a civil war, and all manner of drivel spooks want to drill into our heads.
I disagree that my information is obviously secure and safe, and have inquired at my local health department without response to date. I continue to consider counsel as necessary to redress this issue at law.
You will do as you prefer.
In what was written it never said they gave out people's names so in that regard it's not personally identifiable information, meaning they can't link what they are collecting back to you. When you can come back and publish those words "that they linked name(s) to the information collected I'll find that more reliable.
I am not denying the medical conditions, prescriptions, appointments weren't collected. Collecting information that shows, for example, ten people came in on June 1 for a doctors appointment, six people suffering dehydration were given saline infusions, two people were given antibiotics for a sinus infection, and two people were treated for cuts or abrasions....none of that information would identify you as one of those ten people. As a matter of fact if you have a doctors appointment that is not protected health information. I know this because I was contacted by a group who were doing a world wide study, they wanted me to participate. They were given my name to contact me as to if when I came to the center for a doctors appointment I could stop by their center in the building and start the process to be included in the study. I, like you, at first was alarmed at how they even got my name. Your name is not protected just your health information, which they'd needed me to join to get by signing a waiver.
If you do not grasp that Meta can use Google's location data tracking to link medical appointments to specific individuals, you should give the matter more thought - even if patient names weren't just automatically handed over by My Chart. Then, of course, the specialty of the provider is cross checked against prescriptions and conditions, and Voila! PII. This can be clarified and verified by the purchase data collected when people use a credit/debit card to buy scrips, and etc. AI is real good at such trivial but tedious tasks. Many such mechanisms are used to link persons to 'anonymized' data, and the audacity to abuse our data in such ways as are clearly undertaken to skirt legal proscriptions against availing PII to such corporate knaves is all the reason necessary to end legal fictions altogether, IMHO.
The posture of innocence taken by the agents of such outright lies is one of their features that sticks most in my craw.
This is also why I don't carry a phone, ever.
Yeah I had to go to my doctor today because I really strained some muscles a few months ago and can't seem to work it out. I handed them a cease and desist letter in any electronic transfer of my medical information. I went to a specialist and the doctor said "I see you were at your doctor in February" that, along with the call I got from "All Of Us" to join their study I was like enough is enough. I just told them that the only thing the specialist should have been doing was sending my doctor a report on being there and it was not the specialist business to be concerned with anything other than what I am there for and that nobody granted the specialist building to share my name and phone number to ask to join a study since I was coming to the building. The reception who took the letter faxed it over to the records department and said she totally agreed with me. I didn't do the All Of Us study basically for the same reason, I would have had to grant them the right to share my health information without identifiers to health professionals across the country who were working in collaboration on the study. I just didn't feel comfortable with that. Thanks.
I'm not based in the US, so I don't use My Chart. However, I'd be interested to know the nature of the data being sent to Facebook through these websites, as, unfortunately, there is a vast difference between Facebook knowing that an individual has viewed a page on a healthcare website as opposed to data. I believe HIPPA categories specific data types have Protected Health Information (PHI) in much the say way that the EU/UK GDPR describes Special Category Data under Article 9.
Based on what you have said, using Facebook assets on US Healthcare websites is an effective loophole. I hope the Federal Data Protection statutes will eventually get overhauled and brought into line with the interests of US citizens rather than corporate behemoths.
I have inquired of my local health department regarding this information, but the receptionist of course had no information and said the IT department would contact me 'if necessary'. I am presently considering legal counsel available locally to ensure the spirit of law intended to protect my privacy and security is robustly enforced. I appreciate your salient and sapient comment on this matter despite HIPAA and My Chart not affecting you personally.
Thanks!
Privacy is essential to everyone, universally. GDPR went a long way to show how laws can be written to create strong protections for individuals and a framework for incentivising compliance (fines) - I was initially sceptical of the regulation. Still, now I see it as core to developing our society safely.
Fake book is simply not good because of dishonesty and censorship.
I know there are other reasons. But these two keep me away.
I dont do much there these days especially with a social platform like Hive to be on.
I have never managed to get over the rise in my gorge at the censorship and use it.
Meta collects all information on everyone it can regardless if they have an account or not. How they use that information against people that do not have an account I do not know, but they do collect it and I am confident they find some nefarious purpose to put it to.
Thanks!
Dear @valued-customer, I guessed that you are a medical doctor or a medical researcher.😳
In the world I live in, governments and ruling classes freely infringe on personal information.
Perhaps if they read your article, they will sentence you to three to five years in prison for spreading misinformation and defaming and insulting the government.😨
I am a carpenter.
I have been in prison for three years before, for less reason. I will speak the truth regardless of potential sanctions, but I will endeavor to delay or avoid the sanctions if I can while I do.
Thanks!
This is very useful information. I'm also not in the US, but yeah, there are many good reasons not to be using Fakebook anyway!
I thought this information was great, so I shared it on Listnerds. Thank you for all the hard work!
The more people are aware of this, the more pressure we can apply to make My Chart stop.
Thanks!