Google Health is here — or is it?

(UPDATED: See below.)

google-health-logo-250px.gifWell, the WSJ says so in this somewhat breathless report that states Google will announce its long-awaited personal health-record service today.

My first thought was that the announcement was timed to get Google on the record in advance of the Health2.0 “Spring Fling” conference in San Diego next week, which will feature lots of talk about the role of the Internet in improving healthcare. Another possibility is that Google is pulling a bait-and-switch similar to that of Navigenics, which last November “announced” its personal-genomics service but held off launching it until — well, until not yet.

Yet a third possibility — and the most likely one to me — is that, as this CNET article states, Google CEO will merely “preview” Google Health at the annual meeting of the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society, supposedly the largest healthcare IT meeting in the world. Whatever it is, don’t hold your breath; the WSJ itself states that “[i]t wasn’t clear when the Google service for creating personal health records will begin to be available for consumers to access.”

In fact, the WSJ article doesn’t actually describe Google Health in any sort of detail, and instead is largely devoted to pointing out the major challenges facing personal health records, many of which will sound familiar to regular readers here. These include:

  • Limited adoption of electronic medical-record systems. Only 14 percent of U.S. medical practices even use digital records, which will complicate the process of moving medical information to the Google system.
  • Incompatible electronic medical-record systems at hospitals and doctors’ offices. Because existing digital-record systems use different data formats, systems like Google’s will have to be able to import most, if not all, of them, pushing up complexity and cost.
  • Privacy. Third-party systems such as Google’s aren’t regulated by federal medical-privacy laws, giving providers plenty of freedom to, for instance, sell ads tailored to your medical profile. (Google told the WSJ that “trust between Google and our users is one of the absolute cornerstones of our business.”)

Unmentioned by the WSJ is another nagging question, which is the extent to which patients can “customize” their medical profile — which, when it comes down to it, means the ability to selectively share, edit or even delete information. As I’ve noted before, such customization could undermine the usefulness of health records to doctors, while limiting peoples’ freedom to edit them makes them a whole lot less “personal.”

To be sure, a preview by Schmidt is better than what we’ve seen so far — mostly screenshots of what appear to be leaked early prototypes of the Google Health site, plus a vague announcement of a Google Health pilot project in Cleveland. In fact, the CNET piece mentioned above actually delivers some of the goods, offering a brief description (but no screenshots) of the preview.

Among the intriguing new details: The service will allow customers to “customize” their health records, although CNET doesn’t say by how much; will be integrated with Google’s maps and email applications to allow people to more easily search for doctors and save their contact information; and will allow third-party widgets that work within the platform, such as one that might alert patients through Google’s calendar when it’s time for them to take medication.

It’s tempting to conclude that this steady drip-drip-drip of information is part of a master PR plan for generating maximum enthusiasm for the Google Health service. (If so, it’s working brilliantly.) As for the launch itself, I suspect we won’t be able to miss it when it actually happens. Accept no substitutes.

UPDATE: Google Health chief Marissa Mayer makes the official announcement in this blog post. The bottom line: A launch of Google Health is likely “in coming months,” but not now. There are some nifty screenshots, though — one of which we’ve basically seen before — but I’ve reproduced them both below for reference. (Click either for larger versions.)

google-health-official-screenshot-main-580px.gif

google-health-official-screenshot-profile-580px.gif

Next Story: Google Health has arrived — except maybe not
Previous Story: Roundup: Opera Mobile picks Google for search, ‘Quarterlife’ flops, Zoho updates and more

Bookmark and Share

Tags: , , , , ,

Photo of David P. Hamilton

About the Author, David P. Hamilton

David Hamilton has been writing for VentureBeat LifeScience since April 2007. He formerly spent 14 years as a reporter for the Wall Street Journal in its San Francisco and Tokyo bureaus. Prior to that, he spent several years as a reporter at Science Magazine and as a reporter/researcher for the New Republic, both in Washington.

  • From: http://blog.keyose.com/

    I am a medical doctor. I see patients every day. Including the Emergency Room where I work.

    Because of that, I deeply understand, not only theoretically but as part of my daily experience that patient-physician relationship is the key for the quality of health-care.

    A patient must trust his doctor. If there is no confidence, we lost a lot (patients and docs).

    Saying that, privacy of data becomes a real important issue. A patient that talks about his sexual activities, extramatrimonial affairs, fears, weakness, mental health… should be sure that the doctor will not reveal that information to third parties.

    During thousands years physician have follow this hippocrates oath sentence: What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about.

    So at the moment I designed the keyose (www.keyose.com) service, I have a very clear idea: privacy must be the priority number one!

    Storing thousands of personal health records electronically has a big risk. What if someone unauthorized (a cracker for instance) access to the database? No matter how much money or effort you invest in the security of a system. There is no 100% secure system in the world. And the health information of thousand of people is very attractive to so many people (government, insurers, bank, private companies, criminals devoted to extortion…).

    There are many companies entering the business of eHealth. Google Health, Microsoft HealthVault are just the two most known examples. As a medical doctor I am really concerned about the privacy of data. 90% of UK physicians and German doctors think like me.

    Keyose was designed in such a way that no personal information is stored. We do not need your name, email or identity. And more importantly: We do not want it.

    I would never put my personal, my patients or my relatives health information in a online database that contains the identity of the patients. You can trust me!

    Dr. Julio Bonis
  • A complete & reliable online health information guide that provides information like Health Care,Online health Care,Health Care Tips.
  • abercrombie622
    Ed Hardy Clothing is no curb to the amazing styles of Ed Hardy Clothing.
    http://www.edhardysell.com