sive, this will massively save on
hospital expenditure and improve
the economics of medical industry.
The article also states that “the
recently enforced regulations of the
Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act (HIPPA) could
obviate some contentious privacy battles, particularly those arising within immediate families, by
requiring all patients to consent to
disclosure of private health information and to authorise access to
specific third parties”. This therefore reduces the amount of caution regarding privacy and dignity
within personalised medicine, and
this aids to ensure the treatment
is both fair and continues to offer
patient disclosure in medical practice. The article somewhat answers
the concerns regarding personalised medicine in Regan Kelly’s
work and thus enables scientists
to focus more on developing the
process of the personalised scheme
and eventually put the ideas stated
in the ethnic, legal and regulatory
article into play.
processes. In the absence of what
is needed to know to deliver personalised medicine, physicians can
easily continue to use a certain
amount of trial-and-error methods when they evaluate treatment
approaches ”. Along with the statistics from the Agency for Health
Care Research and Quality (AHRQ)
stating that more than 770,000
deaths or injuries a year are due
to adverse reactions to treatments,
this shows that the benefit of personalised medicine massively outweighs the issues highlighted previously. These deaths also cost up
to 5.6 million per hospital per year,
which shows that although trying to
implement personalised medicine
around the globe will be expen10