No, Amazon Isn't Coming for Your Medical Data
One Medical and Amazon are going to provide a much-needed alternative to consumers who are already frustrated by the health care system.

Amazon recently announced it would seek to acquire boutique health care service provider One Medical. Rather than considering the consumer benefits that may accompany such a transaction, the usual crowd of anti-Amazon, antitrust hipsters rushed to attack this as a problematic entry into yet another industry. These critiques were echoed by some privacy advocates who voiced concerns about Amazon acquiring health data in the transaction.
These critics almost always claim the sky is falling when Amazon makes a move. But just like their prior false exhortations, with a calm and rational examination of this proposed transaction, it's clear these concerns are misplaced. In fact, the privacy concerns with this latest acquisition are already addressed by existing law, and the transaction shows that markets remain competitive in ways that benefit consumers.
One Medical is a subscription-based and data-driven primary care service that currently has a small footprint in the health care sector. With consumer-approved access to health data from products like Fitbits and Apple Watches, One Medical is able to learn the preferences, habits, and special circumstances its patients have. This allows for more individualized care, paired with the shorter wait times and the easier booking process that comes with a subscription model compared to the traditional health care system. A large company like Amazon would be able to help expand those services and incorporate them into the highly competitive landscape. The likely result is more people would have access to an innovative and much-needed form of primary care.
This is not the first time Amazon has ventured into the health care industry. While its purchase of a pharmaceutical fulfillment service in 2018 has been relatively successful, it recently shut down Haven Healthcare, its health insurance joint venture with JPMorgan Chase and Berkshire Hathaway. Far from acting like a monopolist, this continued attempt to reinvent and expand into different industries illustrates that Amazon cannot merely rest on its laurels but must continue innovating to remain successful.
Current subscribers who don't like the integration or don't find it beneficial can choose a more traditional health care model from the many existing competitors in the space. But folks may find that, if successful, the acquisition could help One Medical's niche components become common practice. This can benefit consumers who desire an integrative approach to health care services and improved efficiency—something the company may not be able to provide at scale given its lack of dominance in the industry.
Still, while this acquisition would appear to be a positive for consumers and competition, some antitrust reform proponents like Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D–Minn.) almost immediately called for an investigation into the deal. This is not the type of transaction that would normally merit such intense scrutiny, but for these advocates, everything a large, successful company like Amazon does is immediately suspect.
Fear surrounding what tech companies can and would do with access to health care data is nothing new. After all, Google acquired Fitbit and all of its fitness data, and Apple allowed users to put their own health records on their iPhone. The fact that there are existing laws that require these companies to maintain tight security protections around particularly sensitive data (with severe consequences if they don't) prove these fears to be typically hyperbolic.
Entities such as One Medical are subject to the requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which governs how protected health information can be shared by "covered" entities, like doctors' offices and hospitals, and "non-covered" entities, like fitness apps. While HIPAA is a quite complicated law, it has strong incentives for compliance, including up to $250,000 in fines and potential jail time for violations.
Concerns about HIPAA compliance make covered entities particularly cautious about how they share protected information to the point that it can often be difficult for patients to get their own records or information. Amazon is likely aware of this compliance hurdle because of its existing ventures in the healthcare industry, and it has not only the legal but also the public incentives to ensure top-tier privacy.
Many consumers remain frustrated by the healthcare industry which often involves burdensome bureaucracy, long wait times, and poor customer service. Subscription-based, data-driven services like One Medical are seeking to remedy that by providing an alternative. This acquisition by Amazon could increase the reach of such a model to the benefit of consumers everywhere. Despite the doom and gloom promulgated by antitrust reformers, this move shows that Amazon is not an unstoppable giant but instead a large company that must continue to innovate to stay competitive.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
No, Amazon Isn't Coming for Your Medical Data
They already have it.
They know more about you than you do.
I without a doubt have made $18k inside a calendar month thru operating clean jobs from a laptop. As I had misplaced my ultimate business, I changed into so disenchanted and thank God I searched this easy task (svr-10) accomplishing this I'm equipped to reap thousand of bucks simply from my home. All of you could really be part of this pleasant task and will gather extra cash on-line
travelling this site.
>>>>>>>>>> http://usjobs85.tk
Worse, the ChiComs have it. They’re also known to be working on DNA targeted biological weapons.
Let me get this straight, this is the same magazine that is scared to death over cellphone metadata and obsesses over the cops looking at Ring, which is pointed away from your own house
Also, with the effective and ongoing nationalization of private healthcare in this country still relatively fresh in plenty of people's minds, they say "If you like your healthcare model, you can keep your healthcare model." and are sticking with the MOAR PREVENTUTIV MEDISIN (TEKNOLOGEE)! message when a private corporation decides to get into the healthcare-fund-consumption field.
Indirect government intervention via corporatism good. Direct government intervention bad.
Government wearing the severed face of a private company as a mask like Hannibal Lechter is a private company.
Don't forget their reflexive reaction to any corporate abuse of trust with a response of "private companies"
Yeah, Amazon isn't coming for your data my ass.
I'm sure that, when Amazon/One Medical decide to withhold service to "purveyors of misinformation" guilty of wrong-think, Reason will explain "IT'S A PRIVATE COMPANY!". Hell, I have no doubt they'll insist Section 230 means they have no obligation to provide appropriate medical advice.
Hell, I have no doubt they'll insist Section 230 means they have no obligation to provide appropriate medical advice.
Well, the Good Samaritan didn't offer the beaten (Jewish) traveler any horse paste, so... QED.
Ass paste
I thought medical privacy went out with the requirement to disclose vaccine status to any airline, bus, train or restaurant employee who was idly curious about your "health".
This will be junk insurance that covers nothing.
No, it's Kaiser Permanente for Seattle/East Bay rich folk.
**JENNIFER HUDDLESTON is the policy counsel at NetChoice
NetChoice - "Seattle/East Bay rich folk" and their SFO friends' lobbying arm?
Will there be an exception for (Reason endorsed!) contact tracing?
On the one hand, the article is correct that the hyperventilating over this business decision is overwrought.
On the other hand, the article rather blithely waves away some of the legitimate concerns that we consumers have about the protection of our data. For example, the author simply assumes that One Medical is a "covered entity" under HIPAA and that therefore the HIPAA protections will apply to anything Amazon gets. In fact, that is a quite complicated determination and it's not at all obvious that One Medical is bound either as a "covered entity" or as a "business associate".
For another example, the "severe consequences" are not really all that severe to a mega-company like Google or Amazon.
This kind of gets at a broader thought I have about Reason. Libertarianism, and its cousin/descendant/lover/enemy Fusionist Conservatism, both benefit from walking a finer line. I think Reason often has good ideas, but overstates the points in ways that make the whole thing ridiculous. The libertinism doesn't help this as it tends to align with reduced self-responsibility as well.
To make the libertinism point more clear. Reason works really hard to argue that when things like drug legalization occur that there are no negative consequences at all. There are always at least some, because we live in a fallen world and cause has effect still. You can't try to paint that over. Libertarianism is at its strongest when it makes explicit that freedom requires understanding of consequence.
They don’t seem to fathom that “just not charging anyone with anything” (especially based explicitly on identity politics) is essentially the ultimate stab in the back of actual criminal Justice reform.
Ending the drug war, and creating a frame work of legalization is a major keystone of reform. But just letting murder gangs run the “decriminalized” shop, while street drugs are more available and more adulterated with shit like fentanyl than ever, is going to murder this thing in it’s crib. Basically incentivizing people to give up on real life by letting homeless colonize public spaces and literally shit all over them has been another recipe for disaster.
It’s been a hard one for me to admit to. But For various reasons, Baltimore isn’t Portugal in the early 2000s. I’m not Portugal even is Portugal anymore. Somehow how we’ve taken the route where all of the oppression against individual choice is still there (especially for property owners and workers), but the walled garden has turned into an outhouse for people who don’t give a fuck.
It was on this very site that I read about Ring (an Amazon company) giving video of people's homes to law enforcement without a warrant and without the homeowners' consent.
But medical records? Nothing to see here! Fuggedaboutit!
Suck that corporate dick until it's blue.
the whole my-watch-to-someone's-laptop is creepy as fuck. no gracias.
'....One Medical is able to learn the preferences, habits, and special circumstances its patients have....' That doesn't sound like HIPPA or PHI (Personal Health Information) to me. In truth, they won't take you on as a client unless you provide them with all your data, including personal data even Big Brother didn't ask for in Orwell's 1984 so they can monetize you right down to your jock strap.
No but they'll happily hand it out to "law enforcement" on any whim of "emergency" a would be cop can come up with.
The soi-disant libertarians at 'reason' don't trust the government, but sure, give your life to Amazon? Sheesh. You guys make pretzels look rectilinear. You must imagine Amazon is going to ship you your marijuana with two-day shipping and the sex workers will be working out of the back of Amazon delivery vans.
Why would anybody be concerned about having their medical information in the hands of a company whose whole business model from day one has been monetizing customer data? I don't get it.
I have health insurance, and I'm actually very glad that one day I took care of this matter and issued it. The insurance was very useful to me when I noticed that I had quite severe mental health problems. I went to doctors, but buying antidepressants every month was very expensive for me, so I looked for another way of treatment. If you suffer from depression, OCD, then I recommend TMS therapy. It is a non-invasive treatment that has almost no side effects. Thanks to insurance, I paid for this treatment.