/PRNewswire/ -- The American Association of Public Health Physicians submitted a petition to the US Food and Drug Administration on February 23rd in response to their official stance concerning electronic cigarettes. They cite many concerns, including legal, ethical, epidemiological, medical, and the impact on public health the products could have in the future.
The AAPHP's recent petition dealt with their request that the FDA reclassify the products from a "drug-device combination" to a "tobacco product." They are currently urging all supporters of electronic cigarettes to leave the FDA comments on the docket for their petition so the will of the people may be made known . The AAPHP believes in and promotes harm reduction, unlike other mainstream health organizations who reject the concept.
According to the AAPHP, all tobacco products are "nicotine delivery devices" and that the largest portion of illness and death from conventional cigarettes is due to the products of the combusted tobacco, not the chemicals and other substances found in tobacco cigarettes. The carcinogens are not what cause the majority of the health problems; the smoke causes it when it is inhaled deeply into the lungs and held there.
"E-cigarettes, more than any other tobacco or tobacco-related product, satisfies both the habituation and nicotine addiction," says the organization in their petition. They state that they believe that many smokers struggle with a second addiction to smoking, which is the habit of carrying a pack of cigarettes and lighter, holding the cigarette when it is lit, and the act of smoking it. It is said in their report that there is a significant number of electronic cigarette users who have been successful in switching over to e-cigarette liquid which contains no nicotine while they continue to perform the ritual of "smoking."
Continuing on through the petition, they state that electronic cigarettes, unlike conventional cigarettes, produce no sidestream smoke; that is, smoke that is emitted from a cigarette when it is not being puffed on. The fact that electronic cigarettes also have no combustion is mentioned again, this time in reference to the amount of property damage done every year due to fires caused by lit cigarettes.
The AAPHP states that classifying electronic cigarettes as tobacco products would enable the FDA to impose manufacturing quality regulations, much in the same way pharmaceutical companies are expected to produce their products.
"Objections to FDA approval of e-cigarettes as tobacco products are speculative and largely based on misinformation," states the petition.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Showing posts with label electronic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label electronic. Show all posts
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
Consumer and Privacy Groups Urge Congress to Enact Consumer Privacy Guarantees
TT Note: Insidious surveillance. Now there's a topic for discussion. All you have to do is to watch the news and see who lately has been collecting data, such as email addresses, to make you nervous. Yep, protection of our privacy is so very important.
/PRNewswire/ -- A coalition of ten consumer and privacy advocacy organizations today called on Congress to enact legislation to protect consumer privacy in response to threats from the growing practices of online behavioral tracking and targeting.
"Developments in the digital age urgently require the application of Fair Information Practices to new business practices," the groups said. "Today, electronic information from consumers is collected, compiled, and sold; all done without reasonable safeguards."
The groups noted that for the past four decades the foundation of U.S. privacy policies has been based on Fair Information Practices: collection limitation, data quality, purpose specification, use limitation, security safeguards, openness, individual participation, and accountability. They called on Congress to apply those principles in legislation to protect consumer information and privacy.
Behavioral advertising, where a user's online activity is tracked so that ads can be served based on the user's behavior, was cited as a particular concern: "Tracking people's every move online is an invasion of privacy. Online behavioral tracking is even more distressing when consumers aren't aware who is tracking them, that it's happening, or how the information will be used. Often consumers are not asked for their consent and have no meaningful control over the collection and use of their information, often by third parties with which they have no relationships."
The coalition outlined its concerns and recommended principles for consumer information privacy legislation in letters sent to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, its Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection and Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet.
"Consumers must have their privacy protected as they conduct business and personal matters online," explained Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy. "Ensuring that our financial, health, and household transactions have adequate safeguards must be a top Congressional priority."
Chairman Rick Boucher (D-Va.) has indicated that the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet will consider consumer privacy legislation this fall. Hearings were held this summer.
"The rise of behavioral tracking has made it possible for consumer information to be almost invisibly tracked, compiled and potentially misused on or offline. It's critical that government enact strong privacy regulations whose protections will remain with consumers as they interact on their home computer, cell phones, PDAs or even at the store down the street. Clear rules will help consumers understand how their information is used, obtained and tracked," said Amina Fazlullah of U.S. Public Interest Research Group. "In the event of abuse of consumer information, this legislation could provide consumers a clear pathway for assistance from government agencies or redress in the courts."
"Respect for human dignity is at the core of our concerns, but we are also worried that online behavioral tracking can be used to target vulnerable consumers for high-price loans, bogus health cures and other potentially harmful products and services," said Susan Grant, director of Consumer Protection at Consumer Federation of America.
"Technological advances have made it far too easy to surreptitiously track individuals online," said Melissa Ngo of Privacy Lives. "Congress needs to step in and enact legislation that will protect consumer privacy rights no matter what technology is used to collect their data."
"When a consumer goes online, they expect that the information collected from the pages they visit will be kept private from companies trolling the Web looking for personal information," said Joel Kelsey, of Consumers Union. "We are setting a very dangerous precedent for American families if we allow advertisers and Internet companies to monitor our every click and analyze our every Web stroke, just to sell our information off without our knowledge."
"Limiting commercial tracking of our online activities may also help protect privacy against the government, which often gets information about us from private companies," said Lee Tien, of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
"Behavioral ad technology represents the cutting edge of insidious surveillance. It is essential that national policy puts privacy first so that consumers can fully participate online without fear of unfair data collection and use," said Evan Hendricks, editor of Privacy Times.
So far the online industry has argued that self-regulation provides adequate consumer protection. The coalition said formal regulation is necessary.
"The record is clear: industry self-regulation doesn't work," said Beth Givens, Director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse "It is time for Congress to step in and codify the principles into law."
"We've seen in industry after industry what happens when the fox is left to guard the chicken coop -- consumers lose," said John M. Simpson of Consumer Watchdog. "Regulations that can be enforced to hold the industry accountable are essential."
Among the main points that the coalition said should be included in consumer privacy legislation:
-- Sensitive information should not be collected or used for behavioral
tracking or targeting.
-- No behavioral data should be collected or used from anyone under age
18 to the extent that age can be inferred.
-- Web sites and ad networks shouldn't be able to collect or use
behavioral data for more than 24 hours without getting the
individual's affirmative consent.
-- Behavioral data shouldn't be used to unfairly discriminate against
people or in any way that would affect an individual's credit,
education, employment, insurance, or access to government benefits.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
/PRNewswire/ -- A coalition of ten consumer and privacy advocacy organizations today called on Congress to enact legislation to protect consumer privacy in response to threats from the growing practices of online behavioral tracking and targeting.
"Developments in the digital age urgently require the application of Fair Information Practices to new business practices," the groups said. "Today, electronic information from consumers is collected, compiled, and sold; all done without reasonable safeguards."
The groups noted that for the past four decades the foundation of U.S. privacy policies has been based on Fair Information Practices: collection limitation, data quality, purpose specification, use limitation, security safeguards, openness, individual participation, and accountability. They called on Congress to apply those principles in legislation to protect consumer information and privacy.
Behavioral advertising, where a user's online activity is tracked so that ads can be served based on the user's behavior, was cited as a particular concern: "Tracking people's every move online is an invasion of privacy. Online behavioral tracking is even more distressing when consumers aren't aware who is tracking them, that it's happening, or how the information will be used. Often consumers are not asked for their consent and have no meaningful control over the collection and use of their information, often by third parties with which they have no relationships."
The coalition outlined its concerns and recommended principles for consumer information privacy legislation in letters sent to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, its Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection and Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet.
"Consumers must have their privacy protected as they conduct business and personal matters online," explained Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy. "Ensuring that our financial, health, and household transactions have adequate safeguards must be a top Congressional priority."
Chairman Rick Boucher (D-Va.) has indicated that the Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet will consider consumer privacy legislation this fall. Hearings were held this summer.
"The rise of behavioral tracking has made it possible for consumer information to be almost invisibly tracked, compiled and potentially misused on or offline. It's critical that government enact strong privacy regulations whose protections will remain with consumers as they interact on their home computer, cell phones, PDAs or even at the store down the street. Clear rules will help consumers understand how their information is used, obtained and tracked," said Amina Fazlullah of U.S. Public Interest Research Group. "In the event of abuse of consumer information, this legislation could provide consumers a clear pathway for assistance from government agencies or redress in the courts."
"Respect for human dignity is at the core of our concerns, but we are also worried that online behavioral tracking can be used to target vulnerable consumers for high-price loans, bogus health cures and other potentially harmful products and services," said Susan Grant, director of Consumer Protection at Consumer Federation of America.
"Technological advances have made it far too easy to surreptitiously track individuals online," said Melissa Ngo of Privacy Lives. "Congress needs to step in and enact legislation that will protect consumer privacy rights no matter what technology is used to collect their data."
"When a consumer goes online, they expect that the information collected from the pages they visit will be kept private from companies trolling the Web looking for personal information," said Joel Kelsey, of Consumers Union. "We are setting a very dangerous precedent for American families if we allow advertisers and Internet companies to monitor our every click and analyze our every Web stroke, just to sell our information off without our knowledge."
"Limiting commercial tracking of our online activities may also help protect privacy against the government, which often gets information about us from private companies," said Lee Tien, of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
"Behavioral ad technology represents the cutting edge of insidious surveillance. It is essential that national policy puts privacy first so that consumers can fully participate online without fear of unfair data collection and use," said Evan Hendricks, editor of Privacy Times.
So far the online industry has argued that self-regulation provides adequate consumer protection. The coalition said formal regulation is necessary.
"The record is clear: industry self-regulation doesn't work," said Beth Givens, Director of the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse "It is time for Congress to step in and codify the principles into law."
"We've seen in industry after industry what happens when the fox is left to guard the chicken coop -- consumers lose," said John M. Simpson of Consumer Watchdog. "Regulations that can be enforced to hold the industry accountable are essential."
Among the main points that the coalition said should be included in consumer privacy legislation:
-- Sensitive information should not be collected or used for behavioral
tracking or targeting.
-- No behavioral data should be collected or used from anyone under age
18 to the extent that age can be inferred.
-- Web sites and ad networks shouldn't be able to collect or use
behavioral data for more than 24 hours without getting the
individual's affirmative consent.
-- Behavioral data shouldn't be used to unfairly discriminate against
people or in any way that would affect an individual's credit,
education, employment, insurance, or access to government benefits.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Government Not the Only Ones Wanting Your Info
TT Note: This article highlights some of the potential headaches Americans could face with Obama's electronic information gathering. How many times do we hear on the news that another doctor's office has just thrown out sensitive information? Just wait until the hackers find their way in to your doctor's office. Can someone get me some aspirin, please?
Obama's Support for Digital Health Records May Increase Identity Theft
/PRNewswire/ -- President Obama has proposed sweeping reform of the nation's healthcare system and said he believes all medical records should be computerized and standardized within five years. The President hopes this will result in increased quality of care, decreased costs, and creation of thousands of new jobs. Todd Feinman, a published security expert and CEO of Identity Finder (http://www.identityfinder.com/), cautions, however, that electronic medical records add higher risk of identity theft unless they are carefully protected. "The HIPAA Privacy rules have only been around for a couple of years; many healthcare providers are still unprepared to protect patients' personally identifiable information (PII), which if stolen could lead to identity fraud." Feinman discusses below the special HIPAA compliance initiative his firm has enacted to ensure electronic patient health information (ePHI) is protected.
In 2006, the Health and Human Services issued final ruling regarding HIPAA enforcement and set civil money penalties for violating HIPAA rules. These regulatory requirements call for organizations to proactively protect patient health information, but still too often PHI ends up unprotected in a spreadsheet on a nurse's computer. "If healthcare providers have a security breach, not only would that be a violation of patients' privacy, but also the associated costs would be dramatically higher than implementing some simple, preventive measures," says Feinman. The upcoming changes by the Obama Administration could make organizations' exposure of PHI even worse.
Feinman's company, Identity Finder, has developed software that searches for and secures PHI, the type of sensitive information specifically referred to by HIPAA privacy legislation. Many healthcare providers and healthcare payers are now cleaning PHI from computers using Identity Finder. Wayne Martin, Information Security Officer at University of Virginia's Health System, had the following to say, "Identity Finder helps us locate patient health information so that we can protect it at the source and educate users on the proper handling of information in accordance with University, State, and Federal policies."
Identity Finder has taken a groundbreaking approach by giving organizations insight into the root cause of the problem. Most organizations don't even know where their PHI is. "Not only do we help organizations find and protect PHI, but we also give them the ability to monitor how much exposure the organization has to unsecured PHI so they can prevent data leakage issues." Feinman's engineers have spent years developing proprietary search algorithms to find confidential personal information quickly and accurately.
The software automatically finds PHI such as social security numbers, medical record numbers, dates of birth, driver licenses, personal addresses, and other private data within files, e-mails, databases, websites, and system areas. Once found, the software makes it simple for users or administrators to permanently shred, scrub, or secure the information. Their recently released management console aggregates the data and provides a report card for organizations to see how their policies are performing.
Identity Finder can be run centrally by administrators or stand-alone on a PC or Mac by data owners. For this reason, Identity Finder is an ideal fit for both smaller and larger healthcare providers and payers, as well as other organizations who want to minimize their risks and prevent confidential data loss.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter @GAFrontPage
Obama's Support for Digital Health Records May Increase Identity Theft
/PRNewswire/ -- President Obama has proposed sweeping reform of the nation's healthcare system and said he believes all medical records should be computerized and standardized within five years. The President hopes this will result in increased quality of care, decreased costs, and creation of thousands of new jobs. Todd Feinman, a published security expert and CEO of Identity Finder (http://www.identityfinder.com/), cautions, however, that electronic medical records add higher risk of identity theft unless they are carefully protected. "The HIPAA Privacy rules have only been around for a couple of years; many healthcare providers are still unprepared to protect patients' personally identifiable information (PII), which if stolen could lead to identity fraud." Feinman discusses below the special HIPAA compliance initiative his firm has enacted to ensure electronic patient health information (ePHI) is protected.
In 2006, the Health and Human Services issued final ruling regarding HIPAA enforcement and set civil money penalties for violating HIPAA rules. These regulatory requirements call for organizations to proactively protect patient health information, but still too often PHI ends up unprotected in a spreadsheet on a nurse's computer. "If healthcare providers have a security breach, not only would that be a violation of patients' privacy, but also the associated costs would be dramatically higher than implementing some simple, preventive measures," says Feinman. The upcoming changes by the Obama Administration could make organizations' exposure of PHI even worse.
Feinman's company, Identity Finder, has developed software that searches for and secures PHI, the type of sensitive information specifically referred to by HIPAA privacy legislation. Many healthcare providers and healthcare payers are now cleaning PHI from computers using Identity Finder. Wayne Martin, Information Security Officer at University of Virginia's Health System, had the following to say, "Identity Finder helps us locate patient health information so that we can protect it at the source and educate users on the proper handling of information in accordance with University, State, and Federal policies."
Identity Finder has taken a groundbreaking approach by giving organizations insight into the root cause of the problem. Most organizations don't even know where their PHI is. "Not only do we help organizations find and protect PHI, but we also give them the ability to monitor how much exposure the organization has to unsecured PHI so they can prevent data leakage issues." Feinman's engineers have spent years developing proprietary search algorithms to find confidential personal information quickly and accurately.
The software automatically finds PHI such as social security numbers, medical record numbers, dates of birth, driver licenses, personal addresses, and other private data within files, e-mails, databases, websites, and system areas. Once found, the software makes it simple for users or administrators to permanently shred, scrub, or secure the information. Their recently released management console aggregates the data and provides a report card for organizations to see how their policies are performing.
Identity Finder can be run centrally by administrators or stand-alone on a PC or Mac by data owners. For this reason, Identity Finder is an ideal fit for both smaller and larger healthcare providers and payers, as well as other organizations who want to minimize their risks and prevent confidential data loss.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter @GAFrontPage
Friday, March 27, 2009
Study reveals conflicting attitudes about electronic monitoring
TT Note: Do the crime, pay the time. I guess the question becomes where you pay it?
Minority college students have significantly different attitudes about electronic monitoring devices used to punish criminal offenders than white students, according to a new study by Brian Payne, chair of the Criminal Justice Department at Georgia State University.
Payne, who surveyed 599 students at two universities in southeastern Virginia, found that while white students believe that the tracking device is too lenient, black students are more likely to agree that electronic monitoring is a severe punishment that turns the home into a prison.
“In these tough budget times there have been some states that have looked at jails and prison populations and say we are letting you out in 90 days, but we’re putting you on electronic monitoring,” Payne said. “It’s a growing type of technology and it would help if the public had a better understanding about the sanction and saw it as a viable tool that would assist with the reintegration of offenders at some point and not something that was a slap on the wrist.”
Matthew DeMichele of University of Kentucky, Nonso Okafo of Norfolk University, and Payne surveyed students with questions such as whether electronic monitoring deters crime or if the tool ensures that an offender is punished.
Among the findings, the researchers revealed that 45 percent of white students were more likely to agree that electronic monitoring deters misconduct, as compared to 37 percent of blacks.
Many of the attitudinal differences among the students can be attributed to perceptions about the inequality that minorities see in the application of the electronic monitoring, Payne said. For instance, nearly half of the black students said that the punishment was unfair because wealthier offenders stay in nicer arrangements. Black students also agreed that electronic monitoring perpetuates a racist system, discriminates against the poor and is more likely to be given to wealthy offenders.
Payne, who has been studying electronic monitoring for more than a decade, has also studied offender perceptions of being on parole with a tracking device.
“Offenders that we talked to said that it was better than jail, but it was like jail,” Payne said. “But since then there have been studies interviewing people who were in prison, and those people were saying they prefer to be in prison than on probation. Particularly minorities and those who had prior experience in the criminal justice system were the ones that tended to see prison more favorably than sanctions like electronic monitoring.”
Understanding the differences in the way that different groups perceive electronic monitoring can aid policymakers to develop public awareness campaigns and counter misconceptions, Payne said. The study may also help probation officers better understand the way perception plays a role in how offenders experience punishment and how cultural influences may dictate the probation or parole experience.
“Like other kinds of sanctions electronic monitoring is sometimes used when it shouldn’t be used,” Payne said. “It’s not a perfect kind of sanction and it shouldn’t be expected to solve problems on its own. It requires a great deal of effort from probation parole officers and it’s just one tool that they have available.”
Payne’s study was published in the Journal of Criminal Justice. He is currently working on a study about the use of global positioning systems and sex offenders.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Minority college students have significantly different attitudes about electronic monitoring devices used to punish criminal offenders than white students, according to a new study by Brian Payne, chair of the Criminal Justice Department at Georgia State University.
Payne, who surveyed 599 students at two universities in southeastern Virginia, found that while white students believe that the tracking device is too lenient, black students are more likely to agree that electronic monitoring is a severe punishment that turns the home into a prison.
“In these tough budget times there have been some states that have looked at jails and prison populations and say we are letting you out in 90 days, but we’re putting you on electronic monitoring,” Payne said. “It’s a growing type of technology and it would help if the public had a better understanding about the sanction and saw it as a viable tool that would assist with the reintegration of offenders at some point and not something that was a slap on the wrist.”
Matthew DeMichele of University of Kentucky, Nonso Okafo of Norfolk University, and Payne surveyed students with questions such as whether electronic monitoring deters crime or if the tool ensures that an offender is punished.
Among the findings, the researchers revealed that 45 percent of white students were more likely to agree that electronic monitoring deters misconduct, as compared to 37 percent of blacks.
Many of the attitudinal differences among the students can be attributed to perceptions about the inequality that minorities see in the application of the electronic monitoring, Payne said. For instance, nearly half of the black students said that the punishment was unfair because wealthier offenders stay in nicer arrangements. Black students also agreed that electronic monitoring perpetuates a racist system, discriminates against the poor and is more likely to be given to wealthy offenders.
Payne, who has been studying electronic monitoring for more than a decade, has also studied offender perceptions of being on parole with a tracking device.
“Offenders that we talked to said that it was better than jail, but it was like jail,” Payne said. “But since then there have been studies interviewing people who were in prison, and those people were saying they prefer to be in prison than on probation. Particularly minorities and those who had prior experience in the criminal justice system were the ones that tended to see prison more favorably than sanctions like electronic monitoring.”
Understanding the differences in the way that different groups perceive electronic monitoring can aid policymakers to develop public awareness campaigns and counter misconceptions, Payne said. The study may also help probation officers better understand the way perception plays a role in how offenders experience punishment and how cultural influences may dictate the probation or parole experience.
“Like other kinds of sanctions electronic monitoring is sometimes used when it shouldn’t be used,” Payne said. “It’s not a perfect kind of sanction and it shouldn’t be expected to solve problems on its own. It requires a great deal of effort from probation parole officers and it’s just one tool that they have available.”
Payne’s study was published in the Journal of Criminal Justice. He is currently working on a study about the use of global positioning systems and sex offenders.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
