6 comments

• 

  Josh Hill

  10 months ago

  haha I love the ending. The picture really makes it.
  reply
• 

  Andrew Yates

  10 months ago

  Josh, I'll tell you want: it sure is a lot more fun looking for funny pictures on the internet than it is to do real, boring busywork.
  reply
• 

  Steven Murphy MD

  9 months ago

  This is a must watch fellas...I have posted it twice and will repost it on Monday..
  
  http://masterplanthemovie.com/
  
  -Steve
  www.thegenesherpa.blogspot.com
  reply
• 

  Andrew Yates

  9 months ago

  Steve, please don't, "The Master Plan" is well-polished crap. What is Google doing that this video claims is so bad? Oh no, the announcer said "don't be evil" with suggestive intonation? Oh no, they used currency symbols in the names of the founders? Oh no, let's sacrifice a goat and purge away this great evil!
  
  So what if Google is getting into health care? Give me one concrete fact why Google in health would make my life objectively worse. Show me evidence of this impending Google malice that threatens me personally.
  
  What, because of "privacy?" That's a nonsense word like "patriotism" or "democratic." Yes, it would be wrong if somebody didn't treat me for cancer because they knew I had cancer. But isn't that the fault of the health care establishment, you know, the system that doesn't treat what it knows about, and not the service that tries to learn what about me can be improved?
  
  Just repeat that to yourself again: "Yes, it would be wrong if somebody didn't treat me for cancer because they knew I had cancer." Isn't that just insane? Yet, that's exactly how health care works today.
  
  Give me one good reason why I should defend the status quo of health care. Because it's foolishly funded by risk ignorance, and its only impetus is health emergency? What crap. Instead of me paying to pumping crones full of drugs for two more years of semiconscious Jerry Springer, how about I get health care that improve the lives of young people like me who already seem healthy today? I can see Google providing services like that in exchange for referring my health profile to, for example, drug companies. Fine. Great.
  
  And... this is bad... because I'm only supposed to buy health care that I don't think I'll use to fix diseases that I could prevent?
  
  Yes, I find insipid marketing blather like "democratizing" insulting to my intelligence, but "annoying" isn't "wrong."
  
  But, as far as I can tell, my life has only gotten much better thanks to Google and its satellite projects. Does that mean that Google as a company is rewarded, too? Yes... and? So? Good for them.
  reply
• 

  Steven Murphy MD

  9 months ago

  "So what if Google is getting into health care? Give me one concrete fact why Google in health would make my life objectively worse."
  
  2 words Dean Ornish.....Dean is their medical advisor and what's his answer to better health? "More Love" Bullshit...here's an answer......pay freakin primary care doctors twice what they are getting paid now to see half as many patients....I don't see google doing that...
  
  "Show me evidence of this impending Google malice that threatens me personally."
  http://www.google.com/health_hipaa.html
  Not HIPAA compliant my friend...why does everyone think that sales of this information will be to the benign Pharma companies.....There are several F'in bigger fish that want that data
  
  1.)MetLife
  2.)The Hartford
  3.)Any bank thinking of loaning you money
  
  Give me a break Drew. This play has nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with discrimination.....Think a FICO score is a big deal imagine your banker knowing you are predisposed to heart attacks when you try to take out that mortgage....Come on, you have to see that as a serious possibility, especially know that they have an algorithm to re-identify de-indentified DNA samples....
  
  http://valleywag.com/5025875/google-cofounder-f...
  
  "But isn’t that the fault of the health care establishment, you know, the system that doesn’t treat what it knows about, and not the service that tries to learn what about me can be improved?"
  
  I agree the system is broken, but tests that aren't evene scientifically or medically validated are not the way to fix this problem....How does a SNP scan give you better health Drew. I challenge you on that one. How will a SNP scan be used for better research without accompanying medical data like Coriell???
  
  "Give me one good reason why I should defend the status quo of health care."
  
  I never asked you too.
  
  "it’s foolishly funded by risk ignorance, and its only impetus is health emergency? What crap. Instead of me paying to pumping crones full of drugs for two more years of semiconscious Jerry Springer, how about I get health care that improve the lives of young people like me who already seem healthy today?"
  
  I agree...we should stop treating people who have a negative life expectancy based on family history......And all patients should have to pay out of pocket for ICU care if they have a terminal illness....That will fix the system. NOT SNP scans and google searches....
  
  "I can see Google providing services like that in exchange for referring my health profile to, for example, drug companies. Fine. Great."
  
  It's not the drug companies I care about Drew....it is the financial institutions that set our credit rating and determine our borrowing capacity. You have to see that as a real possibility.
  
  BTW, if you want to get people signing up for these scans all you have to do is give them Google stock for taking the test.....
  
  "But, as far as I can tell, my life has only gotten much better thanks to Google and its satellite projects."
  
  Ahhh yes.......they have done great things in IT, Advertising, Economics, Education. But, unless they want to spend their money on primary care doctors and preventative care delivery rather than collecting bullshit SNP data they will NEVER do anything great with healthcare...Sorry
  
  -Steve
  www.thegenesherpa.blogspot.com
  reply
• 

  Andrew Yates

  9 months ago

  Steve: First and foremost, nothing said refutes my primary claim that the "Google's Master Plan" video is all insinuation and no substance. You and I have created that substance, and credit for this discussion is ours ---not this well-published but shallow propaganda internet video.
  
  I have said that SNP data 23andMe sells now is mostly frivolous, and until it's actionable medical information (which it is not yet), it will continue to be so. Partly, that's because of the "gene patents" you lambasted today keep the most important tests out of SNP chips, and partly, that's because doctors cannot professionally trust tests not that do not explicitly produce medical information. But mostly, it's a new technology in the highly-regulated industry of medicine. It will improve, and patents will expire. It's this idea of SNP scans I like: informatics to human biology.
  
  And I have been one of the first to champion efforts like Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative. In fact, the findings released by studies like this will greatly benefit all genomic industry stakeholders, including 23andMe.
  
  

  
  

  Me: "So what if Google is getting into health care? Give me one concrete fact why Google in health would make my life objectively worse."

  
  Steve: "2 words Dean Ornish…..Dean is their medical adviser and what's his answer to better health? "More Love" Bullshit…here's an answer……pay freakin primary care doctors twice what they are getting paid now to see half as many patients….I don't see google doing that…"
  
  Statements like "Caffeine's effect on the central nervous system interferes with the mind body connection and therefore meditation and relaxation..." does ping my bullshit meter. Does Dean mean, "caffeine is a stimulant, avoid it to relax?" Ok, avoid stimulants to relax. But, some MD newage froo-froo on some board does not make my life objectively worse in any obvious way in which I can readily discern. (and his message of "live healthier by not eating trash and exercise" is OK with me)
  
  As for the futures of doctors, I have bad news, Steve. Health care is seen as much too expensive in the USA. Pretend we cut costs by 50% for the same standard of care. Where in that equation do doctors get paid twice as much to see half as many patients? WHO is going to pay doctors more? On average, for the foreseeable future, the median pay of doctors will only go down.
  
  

  Steve: "How does SNP scan give you better health Drew?"

  
  
  OK: Test X requested in your medical practice has been placed on a SNP scan with sufficient scientific confidence. Does do your services at Helix Health give me "better health?"
  
  

  Steve: "How will a SNP scan be used for better research without accompanying medical data like Coriell?"
  

  
  
  
  SNP scans will add the clinical verification and standards of best practice produced and vetted by Coriell with that accompanying medical data.
  
  

  Steve: "But, unless they want to spend their money on primary care doctors and preventative care delivery..."
  

  
  
  They are spending their money to create software that abstracts away the bureaucratic waste of the health care industry and the expertise of physicians. That is because software is Google's expertise.
  
  
  

  
  Steve: "This play has nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with discrimination…..Think a FICO score is a big deal imagine your banker knowing you are predisposed to heart attacks"

  
  
  I don't see "we will share your information with banks" in Google Health's user agreement, and why should I trust HIPAA and the US government more than Google? From what I read here, Google's policy seems to be even more private than what's required by HIPAA. My assumption is that Google decided that compliance with HIPAA would be expensive, unnecessarily pedantic, and an tool to be used against them by a potentially hostile regulatory establishment, so they gave the entire act a big "F-U" and wrote their own policy.
  reply