In the course of a day I read a lot of articles, typically 40 or 50 a day. Today’s winner both for content and its extremely eye-catching title is “Steampunk Regulation, Medical Technology, and the IT Revolution” by Robert Graboyes. It has a pretty simple premise. It’s the 21st century, the technology (and practitioners!) of healthcare are 20th century, and our regulatory system is stuck in the late 19th century.
Modern life brings with it a challenge that I don’t think enough people have appreciated. If a process evolves more rapidly than the structures intended to regulate it, it cannot be regulated. That pertains to everything from email to firearms to healthcare, just to name a few. Just as the Internet itself functions, regulatory obstructions will just be routed around.
Just to give one example of the breadth of the problem half of all practicing physicians are more than 50 years of age. Many are more than 60. Most people of that age just aren’t particularly tech-savvy. Maybe physicians are exceptional in that regard but that has not been my experience.
As in most else I’m an oddball in that respect. I’m technologically competent and probably more aware of what’s going on in technology than 99.99% of the population. If I were more forthcoming about my background and experience, you’d understand. You’ll just have to take my word for it.
There is a useful idea or two in his piece, but it is so full of ignorance it is embarrassing. Just to pick an example, yes you might find out that Radiator makes your jaw fall off by going online, but you are just as likely, probably even more likely, to find testimonials about how wonderful it is and saved someone’s life. (I wonder if he even knows that large numbers of the over 65 crowd don’t use the internet or use it rarely.) Also, I don’t really see his alternate proposal for regulating, though I guess I don’t need to since I can see where he is from.
http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/04/03/older-adults-and-technology-use/
Steve
Just to address the tech-savvy bit, I think you are mostly correct, but especially about IT. When it comes to the actual tools of our trade, most are pretty good. We like our toys. I have guys over 60 who have learned both cardiac and non-cardiac echo in the last 5 years just so they can keep up, just to cite one example.
Steve
Um, where’s the on button again?
If I were more forthcoming about my background and experience, you’d understand. You’ll just have to take my word for it.
So your server remains private, eh?
Doctors, like lawyers, are mostly untrained in STEM and Economics and for the same reason: entrance requirements that award a high GPA, which many of them know they’re not going to get in Quantum Theory, Number Theory or graduate economics classes. That calculation leads them to take Physics 101, Chemistry 101, Algebra 101 — the “baby science” and “baby math” classes, where they’re likely to get at least a B and even higher if the class is filled with Education, English and History majors.
Of course, when choosing a doctor, you want one who washes his hands. That’s hard to find and hard to know. But, fortunately, their bad English gives them away. “You are judged by the words you use,” and any doctor who says “He is at greater risk for cancer” instead of “He is at greater risk of cancer.” gives you a good clue and you can well judge that if he can’t speak standard English he isn’t very savvy in STEM.
I can’t speculate on what the author’s alternative would be. I can only tell you what I think. Just to take one example we’re not going to be able to control the spread of additive manufacturing which means that many regulations based on controlling access are doomed. In healthcare in particular I think that means that hospitals, physicians, and pharmaceutical companies will need to rely on soft power rather than hard power. I do not believe that the present corps of providers has the skills, temperament, or inclination to do that so it will require a generational shift.