Apple Offers Free Genetic Testing to Cupertino Employees

[Justanotherfanboy]

Ok so I used the wrong word.....

....wouldn’t surprise me at all to find out that this info was used by Apple. But I’m sure you will defend that too.

Lol, you keep on making the same mistake & using the wrong word!
Recognizing it & admitting it isn’t really progress, if you keep doing it!!

You’re sure that if Apple were to get indicted for the bizarre and extreme, wildly unlikely, in-depth crime plot that you’re concerned about.... that I’d defend them??
SURE of that, are you??
Lol. I’m glad you have such confidence in all of your deeply, deeply fabricated fantasies!
See, that is meaningless in REALITY though.
If I say: “I’m absolutely CERTAIN that when we get in a huge world-wide war against magic users, that you’ll side with those fiendish unicorn riders!” it lacks any bite whatsoever.... because that’s never gonna happen, bro. That’s not real.
That’s how you sound to me!
You can’t be SURE about something I’d do, if your wild fantasies become reality.... at least if you’re allowing yourself to indulge your fantasy, where Tim Cook forms a secret society of DNA data scrapers, all sworn to secrecy, sneakily checking notes of chances of their employees developing emphysema late in life... then gleefully looking for reasons to fire them because somehow in this reality healthcare premiums being like .2% cheaper is oddly the only goal in trillion dollar companies & they’ll take ANY chances, and break any laws to achieve this pointless nominal goal... I feel like I should be allowed to indulge my fantasies & answer you: “well, if that does happen- I’m flying to Mars to lay golden eggs!”.
I mean, both of those scenarios are equally probable sooooooooooooo...

 

[V_Man]

Speculation, speculation. How can you back these claims up?

Don’t have to. It’s my opinion.

 

[farmboy]

Thank you for your cooperation, Citizen. The Pre-Crime Unit will notify you if any irregularities are found in your test. Do not leave the area until the test is completed.

Kidding (I hope).

It's a good policy by Apple, although I think there is potential for abuse by insurance companies, canceling policies or not covering your newly discovered "pre-existing" conditions.

Regardless of who is supporting / paying for the testing, this cat won't be going back in the bag anytime soon. It might be Apple today, but it will be everybody down the short road.

 

[ericwn]

Don’t have to. It’s my opinion.

If you cannot back it up it’s nothing but speculation. In dubio pro reo is how the western world functions.

 

[V_Man]

If you cannot back it up it’s nothing but speculation. In dubio pro reo is how the western world functions.

No it’s my opinion. Thanks for listening.

 

[sdf]

If this was Apple's real concern, they'd offer reimbursement to the service of an employee's choosing.

Why?

Sorry, but that's a ridiculous assertion.

 

[||\||]

Why?

As the employer, Apple has a vested interest in this very privileged information.

 

[ericwn]

No it’s my opinion. Thanks for listening.

You’re surely selling it as if it were a fact. I certainly see no disclaimer that you are not willing to have a conversation based on facts and rather make stuff up.

Let’s see how MR looks at debates:

Sources. If you claim that something's a fact, back it up with a source. If you can't produce evidence when someone asks you to cite your sources, we may remove your posts. If you started the thread, then we may remove or close the thread

 

[sdf]

As the employer, Apple has a vested interest in this very privileged information.

Apple also has the best record of keeping information like this secret, even from itself.

 

[||\||]

Apple also has the best record of keeping information like this secret, even from itself.

The best? Well, that's a relative term, and we can't know that they are. We do know that this site showcases internal product leaks from Apple on a regular basis so...

 

[ActionableMango]

https://www.truevault.com/resources/compliance/how-much-do-hipaa-violations-cost

The cost if they were caught would be bad, not just for them but for the healthcare provider.

So? There is no HIPAA violation if you sign an informed consent form giving them permission to share the data. Furthermore, it says right on their privacy policy page that they share data with third parties. So no doubt they are requiring patients to sign that form before they will provide the service.

Yes the privacy policy describes some limitations in place, but it's been a proven strategy that you can change your policies at a later date.

The other big loophole is that the genetic provider could simply be acquired by a third party, in which case it's not sharing with a third party any more. This isn't theoretical--this has also been proven in reality. GlaxoSmithKline bought 23andMe, and just like that, everyone's genetic data was owned by big pharma.

People have pointed out that genetic data is worth vastly more than what a genetic information provider gets in service fees, so a provider "selling out" is very lucrative and may even have been the plan all along.

 

[||\||]

So? There is no HIPAA violation if you sign an informed consent form giving them permission to share the data. Furthermore, it says right on their privacy policy page that they share data with third parties. So no doubt they are requiring patients to sign that form before they will provide the service.

Yes the privacy policy describes some limitations in place, but it's been a proven strategy that you can change your policies at a later date.

The other big loophole is that the genetic provider could simply be acquired by a third party, in which case it's not sharing with a third party any more. This isn't theoretical--this has also been proven in reality. GlaxoSmithKline bought 23andMe, and just like that, everyone's genetic data was owned by big pharma.

People have pointed out that genetic data is worth vastly more than what a genetic information provider gets in service fees, so selling out for your data is lucrative and may even have been the plan all along.

There is no chance of a HIPPA violation here regarding the employer, because the employer is administering the test and also interpreting the data for the patient.

 

[mijail]

Humans and worse yet, corporations,

Corporations are people, my friend!
Just like Soylent Green! ;P
(I like my dystopias in pairs)

 

[chucker23n1]

The other big loophole is that the genetic provider could simply be acquired by a third party, in which case it's not sharing with a third party any more. This isn't theoretical--this has also been proven in reality. GlaxoSmithKline bought 23andMe, and just like that, everyone's genetic data was owned by big pharma.

While your point stands, GSK did not outright buy 23andMe, and it's unclear how much patient data they have.

On July 25, 2018, 23andMe announced it is partnering with GlaxoSmithKline and will allow the pharmaceutical company to use the test results from 5 million customers to design new drugs. GlaxoSmithKline has also invested $300 million in the company.

(It's possible to read this as GSK only getting access to aggregate data.)