back to article US bill to protect reproductive health data is dead. Here's why you should care anyway

Legislation recently reintroduced in the US Senate and House of Representatives aims to protect reproductive and sexual health data and prevent it from being monetized – or used to prosecute people in post-Roe America. To be clear, the proposed My Body, My Data Act doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of making it to a …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Be a man!

    Seems to me that if women can be forced to carry a pregnancy to term - because it saves a life, then men should be mandated to do live kidney donations whenever a match is found - because it saves a life. The risk-to-life, pain and inconvenience a man would suffer is no more than taking a pregnancy to term.

    And of course, all male DNA would then have to be kept on record so that potential donor matches cannot be avoided by the morally weak..

    That would at least level the playing field and I think more male legislators would reconsider their stance on early term abortions.

    1. Jim Mitchell

      Re: Be a man!

      Since livers can grow back after donation, they should include those as well. And blood/plasma donation. Every life is precious!

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: Be a man!

        "Since livers can grow back after donation"


        A partially lost liver can, in some circumstance, regenerate itself to it's original size. I wouldn't bet the farm on it, though. Too much to go wrong in the process.

        1. zuckzuckgo Silver badge

          Re: Be a man!

          How about adding bone marrow transplants to the list?

          Or they could just recognize that the rights of the fetus (or transplant recipient) don't trump a woman's (or mans) right to make the final decision as to what happens with their own bodies.

    2. jake Silver badge

      Re: Be a man!

      Don't give the fuckers any ideas!

      The point is to get the government's nose OUT of health care, not to give them yet another excuse to spy on law abiding citizens.

      Last time I looked, practicing medicine without a license was against the law here in the US ... and yet here we are, politicians practicing medicine without a license.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Be a man!

        "The point is to get the government's nose OUT of health care"

        So you want the government to keep away from all health care issues, such as whether or not commercial bodies gather your medical data and monetize it?

        "not to give them yet another excuse to spy on law abiding citizens"

        Government is the body that defines what "law abiding" means in the first place, including whether or not you have to let them spy on you...

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: Be a man!

          "Health Care" and "all health care issues" are completely different things, as any fule no.

          "Government is the body that defines what "law abiding" means in the first place, including whether or not you have to let them spy on you..."

          Not here in the USofA ... We still have a little thing called The Constitution, although the Muppets Annoying Genuine Americans and their sycophants in Congress and the Senate keep trying to do away with it.

          Stop being disingenuous. It doesn't behoove you.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Be a man!

            "Not here in the USofA ... We still have a little thing called The Constitution"

            Amended by the Government, assembled in Congress. 1992: good change. 1917: bad. 1865: mixed. 20??: ??

          2. ecofeco Silver badge

            Re: Be a man!

            The Constitution you say?

            The Commerce Clause, (in the... Constitution) gives Congress the right to regulate businesses any way they see fit, without any restrictions. None. NO conditions, NO restrictions, nothing. If Congress says business owners must wear polka dot hats, it's... well Constitutional.

            Or are you talking about some other Constitution?

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Be a man!

              The commerce clause gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce. What this means in reality has been changed and challenged over the years, but definitely does not mean "without any restrictions".

    3. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge

      Re: Be a man!


      I applied for a Google account with a reported age of 14 years old. Just to block all the advertising garbage that they send peoples way, but prohibit to youths.

      Now, it might be time to select my gender as 'female' just to get all the tracking apps off my back.

    4. HammerOn1024

      Re: Be a man!


      Move to a state where abortion is legal. There are lots of them. The best way to punish a state that limits or out right abolishes abortion is to talk with your pocketbook, and feet, and LEAVE.

      The whining is very annoying.

  2. ecofeco Silver badge

    Isn't this already covered by HIPAA?

    If this isn't covered by HIPAA already, why not?

    Oh wait, it is:

    So where is the problem is holding those companies accountable?

    1. emfiliane

      Re: Isn't this already covered by HIPAA?

      The trackers aren't considered 'heath care services' for the purposes of HIPAA. One of the things the legislation here would is change that, so HIPAA would apply to them. HIPAA also has a hole you can drive a truck through in the form of state governments and courts being able to force records releases, so another thing the bill does is mandate what data is never collected or thrown away as soon as it's processed, or provides for even tighter sharing regulations than HIPPA. HIPAA merely states that the data that is collected will not be disclosed to an unauthorized third party, except with a court order or for a lawful purpose, so guess what avenue states are pursuing to get that data.

      But the second doesn't even come into play until the first does, until then they're acting as if it's no problem to sell all their user data to anyone who wants to buy it, in the grand tradition of Silicon Valley's egalitarian bulldozing of the whole concept of privacy in the name of profits.

      1. ecofeco Silver badge

        Re: Isn't this already covered by HIPAA?

        How are those companies not considered a health care clearinghouse?

        1. very angry man

          Re: Isn't this already covered by HIPAA?

          Where's the app that tracks men's health?

          Prostate, Viagra usages, sexual preferences, sexualised offences, etc ,. Make the politicians use it , then the data Leaks will be well covered

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    You may get many republicans agreeing with popular "non-republican" laws and ideas, but come voting day, they'll vote the same old crap and suffer the same abuse by those they vote for.

    The politicians know this.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Let's face it

    democracy, as it was meant to be, is dead.

    1. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

      Re: Let's face it

      "meant to be" by whom? The Athenians, who extended the franchise to citizens, who all had to be free adult men – probably less than a third of the adult population? Yeah, that was great. Or the US "founding fathers", who had a similarly restrictive idea about who should be given the vote, and also greatly limited what was subject to voting in the first place?

      And that's just in the US, of course.

      Eternal September is eternal.

  5. Cybersaber

    Keeping issues separate.

    Um, these apps can't share data they don't have. Soooo if you're using an app to, I dunno, track your favorite sports team, and have the data saved in the cloud, you're sharing that data with someone whose whole business plan is to pay people to make apps that make you want to give them data they can sell to buyers.

    Now, there's a valid concern about sharing data that seems to be innocuous today that suddenly becomes criminalized afterward. That's problematic. There's also some valid discussion about accountability for leaking data you provide. There's also a discussion about creating a class of private bounty hunters, and the effects of doing that. There's also discussions to be had about extraterritoriality of laws.

    But let's keep the discussion on track. None of those are about abortion. The fact that the subject matter of the data is about abortion is tangential. Tomorrow a blue state could make the color red illegal, and put a bounty on it, with all the same fallout and ramifications.

    Conversely, even if those online period tracker apps became as regulated as nuclear waste material, and protected like national military secrets, it doesn't change a thing about whether abortion is legal or not.

    Two completely independent and separate issues. Fixing one doesn't change a thing about the other. But politicians and politics are involved, so...

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like