All of this should fit nicely into the White House’s new patient data centralization initiative. They’re doing so by partnering and coordinating with tech companies like Google, Amazon, and Apple to help make this possible. In Canada, this turn of events has raised huge alarm. Americans are right to be alarmed by the prospect of U.S. access to their health records, particularly due to archaic privacy laws and foreign cloud providers who hold the keys to the data.
As experts have cautioned, the impacts of this new program go beyond just data centralization. Canadian clinics and hospitals are adopting software that is hosted in the U.S. at an alarming rate. This increased dependence increases the likelihood of Canadian health data being accessed by U.S. enforcement. The CLOUD Act, adopted in 2018, further muddies the waters. It gives U.S. authorities the power to require companies to turn over customer data regardless of where that customer data is located.
Vulnerability of Canadian Health Records
We argue that Canada’s existing privacy framework does not go far enough to protect its uniquely sensitive health data from foreign adversaries, especially that of the United States. The repeated dependence on U.S. technology companies for electronic medical records, among other things, makes that an unsustainable situation. Health data is typically required to be encrypted and stored in Canada. Since those servers are owned in the U.S., American law can still control how that data is accessed and used.
This new possible loophole is far and away the most dangerous. In a broader context, experts are raising alarms that the U.S. government’s rising aggressiveness might expose electronic medical records stored by tech companies to future seizure. This situation is an alarming threat to Canadian democracy that should concern all Canadians. They should fear their most sensitive health information being scrutinized by foreign researchers or commercial actors.
The continued close coordination between the White House and big tech companies only heightens these worries. Without robust privacy laws or a dedicated Canadian cloud infrastructure, experts warn that Canada risks ceding control over its population’s health data to external forces.
Implications for Canada’s Pharmacare Plan
The convergence of health data privacy and pharmaceutical pricing makes this issue especially timely given Canada’s ongoing pharmacare debate. The Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB) sets the formula for drug prices in Canada. This formula is important for making sure that any future federal pharmacare plan can be sustainable financially.
Through direct pressure and lobbying efforts by the White House and U.S. pharmaceutical companies, Canada may be forced to water down its PMPRB rules. Such changes would devastate the viability of pharmacare in Canada. In fact, just last year, President Trump publicly encouraged pharmaceutical companies to jack up prices in other nations. He argued that larger foreign profits would result in the pharmaceutical industry lowering their prices in the U.S. This stance illustrates a broader strategy that may undermine Canadian interests.
If Canada compromises its drug pricing framework in response to external pressures, it risks destabilizing its pharmacare initiatives at a time when comprehensive healthcare coverage is paramount.
Regulatory Challenges in Ontario
As an example, in neighboring Ontario, lawmakers are preparing to ban exclusivity agreements between insurers and pharmacies. This is a welcome move to expand patient access to these medications. The insurance industry has been vocally opposed to this regulatory path. They contend that these regulations should significantly increase drug plan expenditures, especially for therapies that focus on the treatment of rare diseases.
These regulatory changes in tandem could wreak havoc and cause substantial negative impact. They further muddy an already complex health care landscape in Canada. This means that Canadian officials have new opportunities and new responsibilities to design, weigh and balance their policies. Yet, they are now under intense scrutiny by stakeholders at home and abroad.
This represents an interesting and overarching theme of the global healthcare policy conversation that continues beyond the water’s edge. The VICP was established in 1986 as a no-fault system aimed at preventing vaccine shortages, indicating the intricacies involved when healthcare systems intersect.
