The student news site of Guilford College

The Guilfordian

The student news site of Guilford College

The Guilfordian

The student news site of Guilford College

The Guilfordian

Internet takes new approach to medicine

Over the years, Google and Yahoo have helped answer many inquiries, from lyrics to political events to medical symptoms. These search engines are pretty efficient in providing information and are generally more accurate than our peers. In turn, user-queries have helped search engines predict health trends that might help hospitals and clinics better prepare for their patients.

Everyone has had that headache or sore throat they just couldn’t shake, but before we make ourselves even more susceptible by sitting in a crowded waiting room, many people do a Google search, and hope for the best.

Fever – check, headache – check, dry cough – check, muscle ache, tiredness, chills – check, check, check. Google has answered your query, and it looks like you’ve got the flu.

However, without knowing it, you’ve just helped Google. A couple of years ago the search engine noticed that ailing users conducted searches on flu symptoms before seeking medical attention. This helped to create an early warning system for flu cases.

According to Google’s search data, they have been able to predict flu outbreaks two weeks before the Center for Disease Control (CDC). This system is called “Google Flu Trends.”

The CDC’s records are two weeks behind Google’s because their data is compiled from thousands of doctors, clinics, and labs. Google’s system is a plus since earlier detection leads to earlier prevention and the development of control measures that could prevent or decrease incidences of the flu.

While search engines have the ability to observe the world’s questions and needs, and determine what is most relevant at the time, such developments seem invasive.

Privacy concerns have prevented the partnership between such technologies and scientists. I don’t mind Google Flu Trends tracking my query in order to prevent further outbreaks. Even so, Google has avoided invading their user’s privacy altogether by relying on combined data that cannot be traced to individuals. This collective data seems to be a fitting solution to the privacy dilemma. As much as Google has helped us out in times of need, our contribution seems a small price to pay.

In addition to getting information efficiently, the Internet has also helped us impart information that is a little more sensitive. InSpot.org has developed the first notification system where people can anonymously notify their sexual partners about a potential STD.

This is not your everyday Hallmark e-card, and although the idea seems very awkward, it is much better than not saying anything at all.

The organization launched in San Francisco and more than half the city’s population said that they would notify a sexual partner of an STD risk via e-card. Most of those unwilling to use the e-card preferred to tell their partner(s) in person.

The e-cards have sayings like, “Got laid, was happy. Got tested, wasn’t healthy,” and “It’s not what you brought to the party, it’s what you left with.” As recipients open the cards, they are linked to information regarding the STD as well as locations where they can be tested and/or seek treatment.

I would be a little more hesitant with something of this nature, than sharing some flu symptoms with Google. However, the databases do not store e-mail addresses, or any information about the sender or recipient. It seems like a more animated, but serious, version of Facebook’s Honesty Box application.

Google’s philanthropic sector and InSpot.org are both taking strides to expand internationally. This is all fairly new, but once the kinks are worked out, organizations like these, in addition to WebMD.com, have the potential to become a mainstay in the medical community.

I might be a little too ambitious, but I look forward to never having to wait in a doctor’s office, for the flu or common cold, again.

Leave a Comment
More to Discover

Comments (0)

The Guilfordian intends for this area to be used to foster healthy, thought-provoking discussion. Comments are expected to adhere to our standards and to be respectful and constructive. As such, we do not permit the use of profanity, foul language, personal attacks, or the use of language that might be interpreted as libelous. Comments are reviewed and must be approved by a moderator to ensure that they meet these standards. The Guilfordian does not allow anonymous comments, and requires a valid email address. The email address will not be displayed but will be used to confirm your comments.
All The Guilfordian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *