Trump administration to launch new private health tracking system with Big Tech's help
Officials say the system will broaden access to health records, provide digital tools to help manage diabetes and other conditions, and make monitoring wellness easier. Experts caution that there are a number of ethical and legal concerns.
The initiative, spearheaded by an administration that has already freely shared highly personal data about Americans in ways that have tested legal bounds, has been met with concern from digital privacy activists.
Trump talks up new medical records push at White House event "For decades, America's health care networks have been overdue for a high tech upgrade," the president said in at the White House, where he hosted the event to talk about the administration's effort to streamline medical records.
"The existing systems are often slow, costly and incompatible with one another, but with today's announcement, we take a major step to bring health care into the digital age."
The effort would allow major health care and tech companies to agree on standards for electronic medical records in hopes they will seamlessly transfer between doctors. Trump said the guidelines will also make it simple for patients to access their records.
Trump boasted that health care providers will "finally be able to kill the clipboard," referring to the physical pieces of paper on clipboards that patients fill out at doctors' offices.
Companies represented in the crowd of about 200 people included Apple, Google, OpenAI, Anthropic and Amazon.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
12 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Reddit surges as AI-driven ad strategy wins praise from Wall Street
Reddit's shares surged 15% on Friday after it reported quarterly results that exceeded Street expectations, boosting investor confidence in the platform's AI-based advertising tools and strong user engagement. The company has also posted a rosy forecast that comes on the heels of similarly upbeat results from ad industry leaders such as Meta and Alphabet, underscoring a broader sector shift as advertisers gravitate towards platforms that provide artificial-intelligence tools to create more personalised campaigns. The company expects third-quarter revenue of between $535 million and $545 million, well above analysts' average estimate of $473 million, according to data compiled by LSEG. Reddit's focus on understanding user intent through authentic community conversations positions it to unlock new monetisation opportunities, said Danni Hewson, head of financial analysis at AJ Bell. "Being able to home in on exactly the kind of consumer who might be open to splurge on what a seller is offering has made sites like Reddit hugely popular with advertisers," Hewson said. Reddit's results, along with those of Google and Meta, signal the ad industry's resilience in the face of growing economic uncertainty brought on by shifting U.S. trade policy. The company's diverse ad offerings, including ads inserting brands directly within conversations on its subreddit discussions, remain attractive to marketers. Reddit's daily active unique visitors increased 21%, with analysts saying stabilizing daily active user trends are bolstering investor confidence in the platform's "long-term growth narrative". Despite variable Google-driven traffic posing a headwind in the second quarter, Reddit's U.S. daily active users held steady, expressing confidence that the company's unique content was valuable to both Google and searchers, analysts at Piper Sandler said. The company has been investing in new products, search capabilities and international expansion to offset inconsistent user traffic. Reddit is currently valued at a premium compared to its peers, trading at 74.57 times its projected earnings over the next 12 months, well above Pinterest's 19.39 and Snap's 27.54. If gains hold, Reddit is set to add more than $4 billion to its market cap.
Mint
42 minutes ago
- Mint
Elon Musk's Tesla fined over ₹1,996 crore in Florida autopilot crash case; jury flags ‘responsibility' amid tech failure
Elon Musk's Tesla has been ordered to pay more than $240 million in damages to victims of a deadly car crash in Florida that involved its Autopilot driver assist technology after a Miami jury found the EV maker responsible for the incident. Tesla had significant responsibility as its technology failed, the federal jury observed. Not all the blame can be put on the driver of the car, even the one who confessed that he was distracted by his mobile phone when he hit a young strargazing couple. The jury's decision comes at a time when Elon Musk is trying to convince Americans that Tesla's cars are safe to be self-driven, as he seeks to roll out a driverless taxi firm in several cities shortly. The jury's decision ends a four-year-long case, which stands out not just for its outcome but the very fact that it even made it to trial. Several such cases against Tesla have earlier been dismissed or settled by the company to avoid controversial trials. 'This will open the floodgates,' said Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in the Tesla case. 'It will embolden a lot of people to come to court.' The case also included startling charges by lawyers for the family of the deceased, 22-year-old, Naibel Benavides Leon, and for her injured boyfriend, Dillon Angulo. They claimed Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the accident. Tesla said it made a mistake after being shown the evidence and honestly hadn't thought it was there. 'We finally learned what happened that night, that the car was actually defective,' said Benavides' sister, Neima Benavides. 'Justice was achieved.' Tesla has previously faced criticism that it is slow to cough up crucial data by relatives of other victims in Tesla crashes, accusations that the car company has denied. In this case, the plaintiffs showed Tesla had the evidence all along, despite its repeated denials, by hiring a forensic data expert who dug it up. 'Today's verdict is wrong," Tesla said in a statement, 'and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement lifesaving technology,' They said the plaintiffs concocted a story 'blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.' In addition to a punitive award of $200 million, the jury said Tesla must also pay $43 million of a total $129 million in compensatory damages for the crash, bringing the total borne by the company to $243 million. 'It's a big number that will send shock waves to others in the industry,' said financial analyst Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities. 'It's not a good day for Tesla.' Tesla said it will appeal. Even if that fails, the company says it will end up paying far less than what the jury decided because of a pre-trial agreement that limits punitive damages to three times Tesla's compensatory damages. Translation: $172 million, not $243 million. But the plaintiff says their deal was based on a multiple of all compensatory damages, not just Tesla's, and the figure the jury awarded is the one the company will have to pay. It's not clear how much of a hit to Tesla's reputation for safety the verdict in the Miami case will make. Tesla has vastly improved its technology since the crash on a dark, rural road in Key Largo, Florida, in 2019. But the issue of trust generally in the company came up several times in the case, including in closing arguments Thursday. The plaintiffs' lead lawyer, Brett Schreiber, said Tesla's decision to even use the term Autopilot showed it was willing to mislead people and take big risks with their lives because the system only helps drivers with lane changes, slowing a car and other tasks, falling far short of driving the car itself. Schreiber said other automakers use terms like 'driver assist' and 'copilot' to make sure drivers don't rely too much on the technology. 'Words matter,' Schreiber said. 'And if someone is playing fast and lose with words, they're playing fast and lose with information and facts.' Schreiber acknowledged that the driver, George McGee, was negligent when he blew through flashing lights, a stop sign and a T-intersection at 62 miles an hour before slamming into a Chevrolet Tahoe that the couple had parked to get a look at the stars. The Tahoe spun around so hard it was able to launch Benavides 75 feet through the air into nearby woods where her body was later found. It also left Angulo, who walked into the courtroom Friday with a limp and cushion to sit on, with broken bones and a traumatic brain injury. But Schreiber said Tesla was at fault nonetheless. He said Tesla allowed drivers to act recklessly by not disengaging the Autopilot as soon as they begin to show signs of distraction and by allowing them to use the system on smaller roads that it was not designed for, like the one McGee was driving on. 'I trusted the technology too much,' said McGee at one point in his testimony. 'I believed that if the car saw something in front of it, it would provide a warning and apply the brakes.' The lead defense lawyer in the Miami case, Joel Smith, countered that Tesla warns drivers that they must keep their eyes on the road and hands on the wheel yet McGee chose not to do that while he looked for a dropped cellphone, adding to the danger by speeding. Noting that McGee had gone through the same intersection 30 or 40 times previously and hadn't crashed during any of those trips, Smith said that isolated the cause to one thing alone: 'The cause is that he dropped his cellphone.' The auto industry has been watching the case closely because a finding of Tesla liability despite a driver's admission of reckless behavior would pose significant legal risks for every company as they develop cars that increasingly drive themselves.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
States sue Trump, saying he is intimidating hospitals over gender-affirming care for youth
Seventeen Democratic officials accused President Donald Trump 's administration of unlawfully intimidating health care providers into stopping gender-affirming care for transgender youth in a lawsuit filed Friday. The complaint comes after a month in which at least eight major hospitals and hospital systems - all in states where the care is allowed under state law - announced they were stopping or restricting the care. The latest announcement came Thursday from UI Health in Chicago. Trump 's administration announced in July that it was sending subpoenas to providers and focusing on investigating them for fraud. It later boasted in a news release that hospitals are halting treatments. The Democratic officials say Trump's policies are an attempt to impose a nationwide ban on the treatment for people under 19 - and that's unlawful because there's no federal statute that bans providing the care to minors. The suit was filed by attorneys general from 15 states and the District of Columbia, plus the governor of Pennsylvania, in U.S. District Court in Boston. "The federal government is running a cruel and targeted harassment campaign against providers who offer lawful, lifesaving care to children," New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. Trump and others who oppose the care say that it makes permanent changes that people who receive it could come to regret - and maintain that it's being driven by questionable science. Since 2021, 28 states with Republican-controlled legislatures have adopted policies to ban or restrict gender-affirming care for minors. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states have a right to enforce those laws. For families with transgender children, the state laws and medical center policy changes have sparked urgent scrambles for treatment. The medical centers are responding to political and legal pressure The Center for Transyouth Health and Development at Children's Hospital Los Angeles, the biggest public provider of gender-affirming care for children in teens in the U.S., closed in July. At least seven other major hospitals and health systems have made similar announcements, including Children's National in Washington D.C., UChicago Medicine and Yale New Haven Health . Kaiser Permanente, which operates in California and several other states, said it would pause gender-affirming surgeries for those under 19 as of the end of August, but would continue hormone therapy. Connecticut Children's Medical Center cited "an increasingly complex and evolving landscape" for winding down care. Other hospitals, including Penn State, had already made similar decisions since Trump returned to office in January. Alex Sheldon, executive director of GLMA, an organization that advocates for health care equity for LGBTQ+ people, said the health systems have pulled back the services for legal reasons, not medical ones. "Not once has a hospital said they are ending care because it is not medically sound," Sheldon said. Trump's administration has targeted the care in multiple ways Trump devoted a lot of attention to transgender people in his campaign last year as part of a growing pushback from conservatives as transgender people have gained visibility and acceptance on some fronts. Trump criticized gender-affirming care, transgender women in women's sports, and transgender women's use of women's facilities such as restrooms. On his inauguration day in January, Trump signed an executive order defining the sexes as only male and female for government purposes, setting the tone for a cascade of actions that affect transgender people. About a week later, Trump called to stop using federal money, including from Medicaid, for gender-affirming care for those under 19. About half of U.S. adults approve of Trump's handling of transgender issues, an AP-NORC poll found. But the American Medical Association says that gender is on a spectrum, and the group opposes policies that restrict access to gender-affirming health care. Gender-affirming care includes a range of medical and mental health services to support a person's gender identity, including when it's different from the sex they were assigned at birth. It includes counseling and treatment with medications that block puberty, and hormone therapy to produce physical changes, as well as surgery, which is rare for minors. In March, a judge paused enforcement of the ban on government spending for care. The court ruling didn't stop other federal government action In April, Attorney General Pam Bondi directed government investigators to focus on providers who continue to offer gender-affirming care for transgender youth. "Under my leadership, the Department of Justice will bring these practices to an end," she wrote. In May, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a report discouraging medical interventions for transgender youth and instead focusing solely on talk therapy. The report questions adolescents' capacity to consent to life-changing treatments that could result in future infertility. The administration has not said who wrote the report, which has been deeply criticized by LGBTQ+ advocates. In June, a Justice Department memo called for prioritizing civil investigations of those who provide the treatment. In July, Justice Department announced it had sent more than 20 subpoenas to doctors and clinics involved in gender-affirming care for youth, saying they were part of investigations of health care fraud, false statements and other possible wrongdoing. And in a statement last week, the White House celebrated decisions to end gender-affirming care, which it called a "barbaric, pseudoscientific practice" Families worry about accessing care Kirsten Salvatore 's 15-year-old child started hormone therapy late last year at Penn State Health. Salvatore said in an interview with The Associated Press before the lawsuit was announced that it was a major factor in reduced signs of anxiety and depression. Last month, the family received official notice from the health system that it would no longer offer the hormones for patients under 19 after July 31, though talk therapy can continue. Salvatore has been struggling to find a place that's not hours away from their Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, home that would provide the hormones and accept Medicaid coverage. "I'm walking around blind with no guidance, and whatever breadcrumbs I was given are to a dead-end alleyway," she said. The family has enough testosterone stockpiled to last until January. But if they can't find a new provider by then, Salvatore's child could risk detransitioning, she said.
