Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Geek Speak => Topic started by: syhprum on 26/01/2021 14:39:22
-
When I worked for Muirhead in the late seventies they had a fax machine the output of which was encrypted so that it could used by the military in Ulster without the IRA intercepting it.
45 years ago cheap computers were in their infancy whereas today you cannot buy a can opener that does not have the computing power of a 100 ENIACS built in.
Why is the medical profession frightened of using them when it would be a trivial problem to incorporate encryption
-
I am an enthusiast of Fax machines their output cmmands far more attention than emails
-
They are still used by vets and air traffic controllers. It's easiest to compile a flight plan on a computer, but the final document is distributed by fax because it is robust and universal. Corrupt governments like to interfere with email and internet services but if the Edison Electric Telephone fails, ATC must close the airport.
-
Did they run out of thermal paper?
-
I have a phone/copy/thermal fax, and a heck of a lot of paper, in my collection of sentimental junk - it was only cleared from the desk a few months ago!
Swings and roundabouts. Because many faxes spent a long time idle then had to spew out reams of documents in real time when unattended in the middle of the night, inkjet printing is insufficiently reliable. Brother had a good system using a very wide and rather expensive carbon-type ribbon that is very stable and prints onto ordinary paper (sprocket feed for reliability!) but although thermal paper has stability problems, it does produce a copy first time every time and can always be photocopied for a more permanent record.
I'm looking at my favorite small office printer, an Epson inkjet with bulk tanks and a 200-sheet magazine, which incorporates a fax keypad and socket that I have never used. That seems to be the ideal combination of permanence and reliability as the printer is used enough to keep the jets clean, but seems to have missed the boat in terms of general inter-office communication.
We still keep thermal faxes at airports, so you can hand-write and sign your flight plan and distribute exact and adequately stable copies to all the authorities en route.
-
they had a fax machine the output of which was encrypted so that it could used by the military
How much did it cost?
-
Last year I phoned and asked my doctor's secretary if I could email something, and she said I could fax it or deliver it in person.
- I drove over and hand-delivered it
10 years ago, while defining a replacement for the Plain Old Telephone Service (over copper wires), we discussed support for fax.
- Back then fax was a Big Thing, so support was essential
- But the image was blocky (big pixels), black and white, and slow to transmit
- Back then, it was clear that if you wanted to transmit visual information, a JPEG image was higher resolution, in color, and faster (we were delivering speeds up to 1 Gbps).
Since then, image formats have multiplied (JPEG, PNG, JFIF, and specialized formats for MRI/CAT scans)
- Many moving-image video formats have appeared since then (eg MPEG, WMF, etc), which would be useful for ultrasound and cardiology, I am sure
- Plus multiple forms of email, multimedia messaging and numerous other messaging apps.
- It is quite possible that someone could send a document (or an image of a document), and the receiver not be able to view or print it
- Doctors are paid to know about the human body
- They are struggling to deal with a government initiative to record medical records in electronic form
- Adding image processing to their educational requirements is probably a step too far...
As far as I can see, a radiologist views the electronic image, writes a comment and faxes the comment to the doctor.
- Sending high-resolution images over a low-resolution fax is clearly ineffective
- So the patient picks up the paper/film image, along with a CD (or, more recently, a USB stick), and hand-carries it to the doctor
- The doctor reads the radiologist's report and looks at the image, but ignores the digital format
Yes, we do need better ways to transport medical data, but encrypting a fax machine is not an especially useful one...
-
"How much did it cost?" the military don't use real money they have a money tree you just have to say its in the national interest and the money appears.
-
Pretty much the same occurs in radiology. And despite the zillion manhours spent on standardisation, every manufacturer has his own interpretation of the standard. Not that it matters because you get treated for your disease, not the image of your disease. That merely helps the radiologist form an opinion which is added to the lab reports and symptoms to give the clinician a clue as to what to do next. Cynical? Moi?
-
the military ... have a money tree
Indeed; and the NHS doesn't.
You now know why the NHS doesn't use encrypted fax machines.
-
the military ... have a money tree
Indeed; and the NHS doesn't.
You now know why the NHS doesn't use encrypted fax machines.
No NHS money tree, but selling medical records as soon as they were computerized was a nice windfall ...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2660800/Millions-NHS-records-sold-178-private-firms-And-officials-dont-know-details-1-3m-patients-ended-up.html
-
but selling medical records as soon as they were computerized was a nice windfall ...
But not for the NHS...
"The NHS charged admin costs, but did not make a profit."
-
Adding encryption to Fax machines would cost little or nothing, computer power was very costly 45 years ago but not today, no money tree needed!
-
but selling medical records as soon as they were computerized was a nice windfall ...
But not for the NHS...
"The NHS charged admin costs, but did not make a profit."
Encrypting NHS communications is an academic-point if they are going to supply information to third parties without patient's permission.
-
"The NHS charged admin costs, but did not make a profit."
Whether you are talking about giving away valuable intellectual property, privatising information given in trust for the public good, overegging "admin" costs, or a complete failure of financial control, I think that is the most damning and accurate statement one could make about the post-Thatcher redisorganised NHS.