ADAM TURNER, A FELLOW AT HARVARD, HAS RELEASED A DAMNING
BOOK, REGARDING OUR DOCTORS, AND HOW THEY COULD POTENTIALLY
SELLING OUR MEDICAL INFORMATION TO THIRD PARTIES, CONSIDERING
THOSE THIRD PARTIES ARE MULTIMILLION DOLLAR BUSINESSES.
THE INFORMATION THAT OUR DOCTORS OFFICES USUALLY SELLS OF THESE
THIRD PARTIES ARE ANONYMOUS; HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF OTHER
SOURCES OF DATA, CERTAIN COMPANIES CAN ACTUALLY FIGURE
OUT WHO WE ARE, AND WHAT MEDICATION WE ARE POSSIBLY
PRESCRIBED.
ACCORDING TO THE GUARDIAN, "ALTHOUGH THE DATA IS NOMINALLY
STRIPPED OF PERSONALLY IDENTIFYING INFORMATION, DATA
MINERS AND BROKERS ARE WORKING TIRELESSLY TO AGGREGATE ñ TWO
AGGREGATE DETAILED DOSSIERS ON INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS; THE
PATIENTS ARE MERELY CALLED 24601 INSTEAD OF JEAN VALJEAN."
IT'S A REFERENCE TO LES MIS.
BY THE WAY, I'VE SEEN THAT MOVIE AND READ THE BOOK, SO I DON'T
KNOW WHY I GOT THAT.
PATIENTS ARE REDUCED TO GENDER, AGE, PARTICULAR AILMENTS
AND NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEN, TANNER SAID, DATA MINERS CROSS-REFERENCE THAT INFORMATION
WITH DATA FROM PHARMACIES ABOUT WHO THEY SELL PERCEPTIONS
TOO, CALLED BY BIG DRUGSTORE CHAINS LIKE RITE AID AND CVS.
THINK ABOUT THAT, YOU HAVE TWO SOURCES OF DATA, AND IT BECOMES
PRETTY EASY TO CONNECT THE DOTS AND FIND OUT WHO IS WHO, WHAT
PERCEPTIONS THEY ARE GIVEN, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE
WORKING WITH SMALL TOWNS.
FINALLY, "THE PATIENT IS NOT REALLY A COMPONENT OF THIS
BECAUSE THEIR NAME AND CONNECTION TO THE
PERCEPTION HAVE BEEN STRIPPED OFF."
BUT AGAIN, PEOPLE CAN CONNECT THE DOTS.
FINALLY, "A THIRD KIND OF DATA CALLED COLLECTIVE ANALYTICS
CROSS-REFERENCES THE OTHER TWO, AND MAKES PRODUCTIONS ABOUT THE
HEAT ñ MAKES BRIDGES ABOUT BEHAVIOR WITH WHAT TANNER CALLS,
SURPRISING ACCURACY."
LET ME BREAK THIS DOWN.
IF THEY JUST KEPT IT TO METADATA AND THEY SAID, WE WANT TO FIND
OUT THE HABITS OF 18 ñ 34-YEAR-OLDS IN THE COUNTRY,
BECAUSE WE WOULD LIKE TO ADVERTISE TO THEM, YADDA YADDA.
IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL, IF IT DOESN'T EDIFY WHO YOU ARE,
I SEE ALMOST NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IF THEY ARE STARTING TO IDENTIFY YOU,
WELL, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO USE IT.
HERE'S YOUR STANDARD FOR WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO USE IT OR
NOT: WILL THEY MAKE MORE MONEY IF THEY USE THAT
INFORMATION, OR NOT?
I GET IT, IF THEY WANT TO SELL YOU ñ AGAIN, IF THEY WANT TO
SELL YOU A PEPSI, IT'S NOT REALLY A BIG DEAL.
YOU CAN TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH THIS, BY THE WAY, I'LL
ALLOW IT, I AM MERCIFUL.
BUT LET'S SAY A FIND OUT IF I LIKE COKE OR PEPSI, AND
THEY GIVE ME AN AD FOR COKE OR PEPSI, THAT WILL PROBABLY WORK.
AND I WON'T MIND IT, BECAUSE I LIKE COKE AND PEPSI.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IF YOUR INSURANCE DOES TO USE IT,
TO DENY YOU COVERAGE, OR MAKE YOUR COVERAGE MORE EXPENSIVE
ñ IT'S HARD TO DENY COVERAGE THESE DAYS, BUT IT WILL BE
EASIER PRETTY SOON ñ THEN WE'VE GOT MASSIVE ISSUES.
SO, FOR THEM, THE CALCULATION IS NOT ABOUT YOUR PRIVACY,
THEY'LL CARE AT ALL.
HOW MUCH TO THAT PROGRAM COST ME?
PROBABLY NOT THAT MUCH.
TO WHAT DEGREE WILL IT WORK?
AND WILL IT SAVE ME MONEY?
SO, IF YOU LEAVE IT UP THE CORPORATIONS, THEY ARE MACHINES,
AND THEY ARE AMORAL.
THEY WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO TAKE ñ TO MAKE A BUCK.
WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DO NOT DO THINGS LIKE THAT, AND
YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHERE TO DRAW THE LINES.
OF COURSE CORPORATIONS ARE LOOKING TO MAKE MONEY, SO IF
THEY CAN GET THEIR HANDS ON THIS DATA THEY WILL DO WHATEVER THEY
CAN TO GET HER HANDS ON IT, BUT ANOTHER COMPONENT I WORRY ABOUT
IS, IF WE START ALLOWING OUR PRIVACY, REGARDING OUR HEALTH,
TO JUST BE OUT THERE, AND TO BE SOLD, AND ALL OF OUR DIRTY
LITTLE SECRETS TO BE, YOU KNOW, EXPOSED, I WORRY THAT PEOPLE
WON'T SEEK THE HEALTH CARE THAT THEY NEED.
MAYBE YOU'RE FEELING SICK AND YOU'RE LIKE, I DON'T KNOW,
I DON'T TRUST MY DOCTOR, I DON'T WANT THIS INFORMATION TO
GET OUT THERE SO MAYBE I'LL HANDLE IT MYSELF.
I WORRY ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
AND REMEMBER, YOU GO TO A DOCTOR, AND YOU CONFIDE IN
HIM OR HER BECAUSE YOU ARE UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT IT IS
ALL GOING TO BE PRIVATE, RIGHT?
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
I'LL GIVE YOU A SUPER GOOFY EXAMPLE FROM MY PAST.
WHEN I WAS SINGLE I WOULD GET STD TESTS MANIACALLY, NOT
BECAUSE I WAS SUPER SEXUALLY ACTIVE, JUST BECAUSE I
WANTED TO GET TESTED ALL THE TIME, AND WHEN I WOULD GO
IN I WOULD GIVE A FAKE NAME, LIKE WHATEVER, JOE JOHNSON.
AND AT THE END, IF IT CAME OUT CLEAN I WOULD BE LIKE, OH
YEAH I'M CENK UYGUR.
BUT ANYWAY, TO YOUR POINT, THIS IS NOT LIKE OTHER THINGS.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE'S A HOTEL I LIKE, I CIRCUIT ONLINE,
SOMEBODY ñ I SEARCH IT ONLINE, AND THEN SOMEONE TAKES THE
COOKIES FROM MY COMPUTER, AND THEN THEY SHOW ME A PRETTY
PICTURE OF THAT HOTEL, SAME THING WITH TACO BELL, I GET
IT, THAT'S CAPITALISM.
BUT IT'S DIFFERENT WHEN IT COMES TO YOUR HEALTH, SO WE'VE
GOT TO HAVE BETTER REGULATIONS ON THAT.
ABSOLUTELY.
I WANT TO LEAVE YOU WITH ONE DETAIL FROM THIS STORY, WHICH I
THINK IS UNSURPRISING BECAUSE IT SHOWS YOU HOW MUCH POWER
CORPORATIONS HAVE OVER PRIVATE CITIZENS IN THE U.S.
THIS UP IN COURT ACTUALLY RULED IN 2011 THAT CORPORATIONS
ARE A LITTLE MORE THAN PEOPLE AND THEIR PRIVACY.
IN 2011, THE SUPREME COURT STRUCK DOWN A VERMONT LAW
RESTRICTING THE SALE, DISCLOSURE, AND USE OF RECORDS
THAT REVEAL DEEPEST DRIVING PRACTICES OF INDIVIDUAL DOCTORS,
RULING THAT CORPORATIONS RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH TRUMPED
INDIVIDUALS RIGHT TO PRIVACY."
THAT'S AMAZING.
THAT HAS SUCH IMPORTANT RAMIFICATIONS FOR
EVERYTHING THAT WE TALK ABOUT.
SO NOT ONLY DID WE INVENT THESE THINGS CALLED CORPORATIONS, THEY
ARE LITERALLY A LEGAL FICTION: THEY DON'T EXIST IN NATURE, IF
YOU RUN AROUND IN THE WOODS YOU'RE LIKELY TO RUN INTO A
CORPORATION.
IT'S SOMETHING WE INVENTED AS HUMANS, AND WE EMPOWERED
AND WROTE THE RULES FOR.
GO MAKE EVERY CENT YOU CAN, AND IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN YOUR
PATH, CRUSH IT, DESTROY IT TO MAKE A PENNY.
WHAT A STUPID THING TO WRITE INTO THE CODE OF A MACHINE.
PEOPLE ALWAYS WONDER, WHEN OTHER MACHINES GOING TO TAKE OVER?
I'VE GOT NEWS FOR YOU, THEY'VE ALREADY TAKEN OVER, IT'S
THE CORPORATIONS.
AND NOT ONLY THAT, THEY WILL HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS NOW,
ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH INALIENABLE RIGHTS.
WAIT A MINUTE, WE ARE THE CREATOR, THAT DOESN'T MAKE
ANY SENSE.
BUT NOW THEY HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN A HUMAN BEING DOES.
THEIR RIGHT TO PROFIT, UNDER THE GUISE OF THEIR HUMAN RIGHT TO
FREE SPEECH ñ THE SUPREME COURT CALLS THEM PEOPLE, OKAY?
SO DO REPUBLICANS.
REMEMBER MITT ROMNEY?
CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE, MY FRIENDS.
THAT WAS A LITTLE QUOTE FROM THE 2012
CAMPAIGN, AND HE REALLY BELIEVES IT.
NOW THESE MACHINES HAVE MORE RIGHTS THAN WE DO.
THAT IS INSANITY.
THAT'S WHAT YOU NEED A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO
GET RID OF.
BECAUSE THE SPRING COURT SAYS, I DON'T CARE, I'M GOING TO
INTERPRET THE CONSTITUTION TO SAY THAT CORPORATIONS ARE THE
BEST, HUMANS SUCK, AND YOU HAVE AS MANY RIGHTS AS CORPORATIONS.
WE'VE GOT TO GO ABOVE THIS ñ ABOUT THE SERENE COURT AND
PASS A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
ANY DEMOCRATS WHO TAKE MONEY FROM CORPORATIONS SAY WE
SHOULDN'T DO THAT BECAUSE AMERICAN PEOPLE REALLY LIKE
CORPORATIONS.
WHICH AMERICAN PEOPLE?
RECENT POLLS HAD THEM LESS POPULAR THAN POLITICIANS, WHICH
IS UNBELIEVABLE.
LESS POPULAR THAN MEDIA WAS LARGE CORPORATIONS.
THOSE ARE THE MACHINES THAT TOOK OVER.
WHEN IT COMES TO OUR PRIVACY AND EVERY OTHER THING, WE'VE
GOT TO FIGHT BACK.