Joe Biden Wants US Government Algorithms Tested for Potential Harm Against Citizens; Wired, November 1, 2023

KHARI JOHNSON , Wired; Joe Biden Wants US Government Algorithms Tested for Potential Harm Against Citizens

"The White House issued draft rules today that would require federal agencies to evaluate and constantly monitor algorithms used in health care, law enforcement, and housing for potential discrimination or other harmful effects on human rights.

Once in effect, the rules could force changes in US government activity dependent on AI, such as the FBI’s use of face recognition technology, which has been criticized for not taking steps called for by Congress to protect civil liberties. The new rules would require government agencies to assess existing algorithms by August 2024 and stop using any that don’t comply.

“If the benefits do not meaningfully outweigh the risks, agencies should not use the AI,” the memo says. But the draft memo carves out an exemption for models that deal with national security and allows agencies to effectively issue themselves waivers if ending use of an AI model “would create an unacceptable impediment to critical agency operations.”"

Federal officials caution employers on using AI in hiring; FCW, May 12, 2022

Natalie Alms, FCW; Federal officials caution employers on using AI in hiring

"The growing use of artificial intelligence and other software tools for hiring, performance monitoring and pay determination in the workplace is compounding discriminiation against people with disabilities, federal civil rights officials say.

Artificial intelligence can be deployed to target job ads to certain potential applicants, hold online job interviews, assess the skills of job applicants and even decide if an applicant meets job requirements. But the technology can discriminate against applicants and employees with disabilities.

On Thursday, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Justice put employers on alert that they're responsible for not using AI tools in ways that discriminate and inform employees of their rights, agency officials told reporters."

Consumer DNA Testing May Be the Biggest Health Scam of the Decade; Gizmodo, November 20, 2019

Ed Cara, Gizmodo; Consumer DNA Testing May Be the Biggest Health Scam of the Decade

"This test, as well as many of those offered by the hundreds of big and small DNA testing companies on the market, illustrates the uncertainty of personalized consumer genetics.

The bet that companies like 23andMe are making is that they can untangle this mess and translate their results back to people in a way that won’t cross the line into deceptive marketing while still convincing their customers they truly matter. Other companies have teamed up with outside labs and doctors to look over customers’ genes and have hired genetic counselors to go over their results, which might place them on safer legal and medical ground. But it still raises the question of whether people will benefit from the information they get. And because our knowledge of the relationship between genes and health is constantly changing, it’s very much possible the DNA test you take in 2020 will tell you a totally different story by 2030."

Artificial intelligence in medicine raises legal and ethical concerns; The Conversation, September 4, 2019

Sharona Hoffman , The Conversation; Artificial intelligence in medicine raises legal and ethical concerns

"The use of artificial intelligence in medicine is generating great excitement and hope for treatment advances.

AI generally refers to computers’ ability to mimic human intelligence and to learn. For example, by using machine learning, scientists are working to develop algorithms that will help them make decisions about cancer treatment. They hope that computers will be able to analyze radiological images and discern which cancerous tumors will respond well to chemotherapy and which will not.

But AI in medicine also raises significant legal and ethical challenges. Several of these are concerns about privacy, discrimination, psychological harm and the physician-patient relationship. In a forthcoming article, I argue that policymakers should establish a number of safeguards around AI, much as they did when genetic testing became commonplace."

Obama chief data scientist: Trumpcare health plan would ‘cripple’ precision medicine; FedScoop, May 24, 2017

Billy Mitchell, FedScoop; Obama chief data scientist: Trumpcare health plan would ‘cripple’ precision medicine

"DJ Patil, U.S. chief data scientist in the latter years of Barack Obama’s presidency, wrote on Medium that Trumpcare, as the AHCA is nicknamed, would threaten the country’s ability to leverage data to advance medical science, particularly in the fight against major diseases like cancer. The White House’s proposal would allow insurance companies to deny coverage or charge more when people have preexisting medical conditions. That provision could make people less willing to share important information about themselves with researchers, Patil says, because of fear it could be used against them later.

“[M]y deep fear is that people won’t be willing to donate their data. And there are too many people who have diseases that need us to donate our data to help,” Patil writes.

At the center of the Precision Medicine Initiative introduced under Obama is the “responsible collection of large amounts of data to be able to develop truly customized medical treatments for each patient,” Patil explains. The Trump legislation essentially threatens that project."

That Health Tracker Could Cost You; Bloomberg, February 23, 2017

Cathy O'Neil, Bloomberg; 

That Health Tracker Could Cost You

"Say, for example, left-handed people with vegetarian diets prove more likely to require expensive medical treatments. Insurance companies might then start charging higher premiums to people with similar profiles -- that is, to those the algorithm has tagged as potentially costly. Granted, the Affordable Care Act currently prohibits such discrimination. But that could change if Donald Trump fulfills his promise to repeal the law.

Think about what that means for insurance...

If we're not careful, pretty soon it’ll be almost like there's no insurance at all."