Princess of Wales discusses cancer recovery
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
37 minutes ago
- Forbes
The 3 C's Of Impactful Healthcare Innovation
Frank Harvey, Chief Executive Officer for Surescripts. Complicated. That's the word that comes to mind when I think of healthcare. Even for a thing as simple as seeing the doctor for a nagging cough and getting a prescription at the pharmacy, the whole process can be surprisingly complex and costly. Despite incredible advancements in medicine and technology, we've yet to solve some contributors to clinician burnout that can add stress to the entire healthcare ecosystem and, most notably, erode patients' trust in their providers. According to Gallup's annual rating of U.S. professions, trust in medical doctors has fallen 14% since 2021, and at 53%, is now the lowest since the mid-1990s. This doesn't have to be the case. As technology innovators in healthcare, it's up to us to improve healthcare with access to technological innovation that enables better quality, safer and less costly care for patients. We can meaningfully transform our industry with three C's: collaboration, comprehensive solutions and commitment to purpose. 1. Collaboration What it means for healthcare: The different parts of healthcare have more in common than helping care for patients. Physicians, pharmacists, care managers, life sciences companies and healthcare technology providers are just some of healthcare's parts that often face the same challenges, including burnout, rising costs and the complexity of providing quality care, but they may require different solutions. Cross-industry collaboration is key. We need to work together to diagnose the problems each healthcare sector faces and develop technologies to solve collective challenges, like prior authorization (an area in which my company works). In context: Prior authorization is intended to protect patient safety and manage costs. But with over 37% of medical plans using a manual prior authorization process dependent on phone, mail, fax or email, according to a 2023 CAQH Insights report, this can be very tedious for patients. For providers, prior authorization delays and administrative burden stoke frustration and burnout. Ninety-four percent of physicians surveyed by the American Medical Association say that the process always, often or sometimes delays care, and virtually all (95%) said prior authorization somewhat or significantly increases burnout. And at the pharmacy, prior authorization issues can keep pharmacists from filling prescriptions and spending more time with patients, with over half of pharmacists and prescribers describing following up on prior authorizations as 'very frustrating' in a 2021 survey from my company. These care providers tend to have the same prevailing concern: Prior authorizations take too much time and manual work, which negatively impacts their ability to focus on their patients. Collaboration can help identify the nuances and similarities of their challenges—a critical first step. Leaders need to leverage their existing ability to exchange health intelligence to take collaboration to the next level and develop solutions that meaningfully improve how they care for patients. 2. Comprehensive And Impactful Technology Solutions What it means for healthcare: Technology and innovations that focus only on a single segment are likely just shifting the burden or creating a new challenge somewhere else. As a result, patients often face the most significant consequences of siloed innovation. Comprehensive technology solutions depend on collaboration and can lead to a more holistic approach where every part of healthcare sees improvement—especially patients. In context: While AI tools will grab headlines, these tools are likely only addressing one element of the system and may not be truly alleviating the burden on care providers. Instead, I believe we need collaboration between health plans and care providers to develop systemic innovation. Together, we can build on the nationwide interoperability that exists today to deliver a swift, consistent and comprehensive experience for patients and those who care for them. Collaboration can take many forms but really relies on the opportunity for discussion and sharing ideas. So next time you're at a conference, meeting a stakeholder from another organization or a former colleague for coffee, remember to be intentional about connecting ideas and seeking out different points of view. It could lead to the next comprehensive fix that leads to meaningful impact for care providers and their patients. 3. Commitment To A Shared Purpose What it means for healthcare: It's important to remember why we're doing this work in the first place. Regardless of what part of healthcare we represent, we're all in this industry with the same purpose in mind—improving patient care. In context: When we recognize that across healthcare we are committed to a shared purpose, the ability to collaborate and develop comprehensive, innovative technologies becomes far easier. Recognizing the purpose behind organizations that compete in the same industry can be challenging—especially when focusing on a recent product launch, earnings report or partnership announcement. But when we peel back a layer to look beyond the headline, we ought to ask ourselves why this announcement matters. Looking closer, you'll see that launching a new product or announcing the latest financial report is simply a way to measure success toward achieving that organization's underlying purpose. In my experience, this purpose is always about making healthcare better for patients and those who care for them. It's important to keep this in mind and work to deliver messages that connect us back to our purpose. When we do this across an industry, we can see more clearly that we're all committed to something bigger, and it's a reminder that collaboration toward this end is our greatest strength. Conclusion The ability to impact or even save lives is the purpose we ought to be working toward. It reinforces why collaboration is critical to tackling difficult problems but can also help amplify impact and fuel continued innovations. And when all of the pieces come together, I think the result will be bringing meaningful improvements to healthcare for patients and those who care for them. Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?
The Verge
42 minutes ago
- The Verge
RFK Jr.'s plan to put ‘AI' in everything is a disaster
In a 92-minute interview with Tucker Carlson on Monday, RFK Jr. drilled down on his vision for the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Artificial intelligence — arguably, a uselessly vague umbrella term — came up multiple times. (As did conspiracy theories and disinformation on vaccines and autism, the medical establishment, and covid-19 deaths.) As the head of HHS, Kennedy said his federal department is undergoing an 'AI revolution.' He implored viewers to 'stop trusting the experts,' as highlighted by Gizmodo, and, presumably, put their trust into AI instead of decades of scientific consensus. He referenced that AI tools were being used to 'detect waste, abuse, and fraud' across the federal government — the tagline for Elon Musk's misguided and disastrous DOGE initiative that's already led to a scramble to rehire hundreds of wrongfully cut CDC employees. Kennedy also vaguely declared that the CDC will be using AI to 'look at the mega data that we have and be able to make really good decisions about interventions,' demonstrating how flimsy his grasp of AI is. Kennedy said that AI will rapidly accelerate the drug approval process at the FDA, implying it will fully replace animal testing. This is not entirely new, echoing an April announcement from Kennedy's Food and Drug Administration that the agency will be phasing out animal testing for some pharmaceuticals in favor of 'AI-based computational models' and other countries' safety data. That agency-level change followed the 2022 passage the FDA Modernization Act 2.0 under President Joe Biden, which repealed requirements for all new drugs to undergo animal testing. There is a lot of ongoing research into the potential for alternate approaches like organ-on-chip systems, organoid cultures, and AI models to supplement or reduce the amount of animal testing used in drug development. And computer modeling has long been a part of pharmaceutical evaluation. However, it's likely premature to claim that AI can wholly eliminate the need for animal models. 'There is currently no full replacement for animal models in biomedical research and drug development,' wrote the National Association for Biomedical Research in an April statement. Even more concerning were Kennedy's hints that the current Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which is overseen by the CDC, is set to be overhauled and outfitted with AI. (He previously suggested automating the system in April.) VAERS is a first-line detection system for catching rare, previously undetected risks associated with vaccines that has often been misrepresented by anti-vaccine advocates. AI drug testing may sound unsettling, but it would be conducted by external researchers and drug makers. Pharmaceutical companies are incentivized to not release dangerous products because they lose money when they harm people; Kennedy wouldn't be so directly held to account. Misinterpretation of VAERS data at the institutional level could sow further distrust in public health and give Kennedy's newly appointed vaccine advisory committee ammunition to change vaccine recommendations, legitimize their fringe beliefs, and limit vaccine access. Anyone can report to VAERS (and certain providers are required to report) anytime a person experiences any negative health event in the aftermath of a vaccination. A report to VAERS does not indicate causality. 'There's nothing about VAERS that allows us to determine whether a vaccine caused the reported adverse event,' says Kawsar Talaat, an infectious disease physician and vaccine safety researcher at Johns Hopkins University. 'People report things like anger after vaccination,' she says, for which there's no biologically plausible mechanism relating back to immunization. Even more serious events, like death following a vaccination, overwhelmingly bear out to be unrelated to the shot itself. 'The thing about vaccines is they protect against preventable diseases, not everything else that occurs in life,' says Paul Offit, a vaccine scientist, virologist, and professor of pediatrics at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Yet even so, VAERS reports are followed up with CDC investigation through complementary programs like Vaccine Safety Datalink and the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment Project. The system has worked since its establishment in 1986 to generate hypotheses for potential vaccine side effects and even to detect very rare vaccine risks. For instance, VAERS did successfully pick up the myocarditis associated with mRNA covid-19 vaccines, which only showed up in about one per 30,000 doses, and the blood clotting associated with the Johnson & Johnson covid-19 shot, which affected about one in 250,000 people, Offit notes. 'You're not going to pick that up pre-licensure, so I think VAERS works well,' he says. 'The problem is that anti-vaccine activists use it to mean that anything reported in that system is a real issue, which is obviously wrong,' he adds — echoing Talaat's point that anyone can report anything. It's not clear how Kennedy plans to introduce AI into VAERS, but presumably he means to feed VAERS data into some sort of automated system for identifying alleged vaccine side effects and risks. Earlier this year, the top US vaccine regulator at the FDA was forced out over his refusal to grant Kennedy unfettered access to the VAERS database, out of fears he and his appointees would manipulate the data. Now, with little standing in his way, Kennedy seems poised to do just that. There is a reasonable argument to be made that the right set of machine learning algorithms or AI tools could streamline the review process for VAERS claims. But AI systems are only as good as their training and parameters. If you feed them faulty information, that's what they're going to regurgitate. If you build an AI system to validate your preexisting belief that vaccines are dangerous, that's exactly what it will do. Despite the genuine promise that some AI approaches have in health policy and medicine, experts routinely emphasize that we need to tread carefully in building, vetting, and adopting these technologies. Bias, privacy concerns, legal challenges, and user manipulation all remain major issues, according to one 2024 review of 120 studies of generative AI in medicine. (Not to mention hallucinations: In May, the 'Make America Healthy Again Commission,' a presidential advisory committee chaired by Kennedy, released a likely AI-generated report containing false citations to studies that did not exist.) The key question here is if an AI vaccine risk-assessment system could be developed fairly and accurately under Kennedy's leadership. Offit, at least, doesn't think so. 'Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is an anti-vaccine activist, a science denialist, and a conspiracy theorist,' he says. 'He will do everything he can, as long as he is in this position, to make vaccines less available, less affordable, and more feared.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Weight-loss jabs on NHS may be rolled out ‘in high streets and shopping centres'
People could soon get their NHS weight-loss jabs via shopping centres, a new health plan suggests, after the Health Secretary said the injections were the 'talk of the House of Commons tea rooms'. The 10-year plan for the health service says there is a need to expand access to weight-loss services and treatments and bring them closer to where people live and work. It says the Government will work with industry 'to test innovative models of delivering weight loss services and treatments to patients effectively and safely' in convenient locations, which may include 'on the high street, or at any out-of-town shopping centre'. Digital-only models, where everything is done and managed online, may also be put in place, the plan says. Furthermore, companies will not just paid if people lose weight, 'but if that also translates into outcomes that really matter for patients, such as fewer heart attacks, strokes or cancer diagnoses'. Earlier, Health Secretary Wes Streeting said weight-loss jabs should be available according to need, not the ability to pay. At the moment, people with a body mass index (BMI) of 35 or more, or 30 but with a linked health condition, can be prescribed jabs on the NHS through specialist weight-management services. Other people are paying hundreds of pounds a month to get the jabs privately. Mr Streeting told LBC radio: 'Weight-loss jabs are the talk of the House of Commons tea rooms, half my colleagues are on them and are judging the rest of us saying 'you lot should be on them'. 'And the thing is, if you can afford these weight loss jabs, which can be over 200 quid a month, well that's all right for you. 'But most people in this country haven't got a spare two and a half grand a year and often the people who have the worst and most challenging obesity also have the lowest income. 'So I'm bringing to weight loss jabs the principle of fairness which has underpinned the NHS. 'It should be available based on need and not the ability to pay. 'And that's what we're going to do on weight-loss jabs, as well as a number of other things, including people getting more fit, more active, supporting people on diet and nutrition….that's the bit of the weight-loss jab debate that sometimes gets lost. 'It's not that you can have some weight-loss jabs and stuff your face with Jaffa cakes…' He said obesity cost the NHS billions a year, adding that taxes have been going 'up and up' to pay for the health service.
