Tag: RFK Jr.

  • Is Web3 Ready To Revolutionize Healthcare?

    Is Web3 Ready To Revolutionize Healthcare?

    Late last year, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) took a bold step toward modernizing healthcare data exchange by finalizing The Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA). This initiative aimed to enhance equity, innovation, and interoperability by facilitating the secure exchange of electronic health records (EHRs). At its core, TEFCA sought to democratize access to healthcare data, ensuring that patients, providers, and researchers could benefit from seamless, standardized information-sharing.

    However, under the new presidential administration, the future of this initiative is uncertain. Shifting regulatory priorities and skepticism toward broad healthcare reforms suggest that TEFCA’s vision of an open, interoperable health data network may never be fully realized.

    This raises a pressing question: Can Web3 step in to bridge the gap?

    Web3 in Healthcare—powered by blockchain, decentralized storage, and tokenized ecosystems now officially branded as DeSci and oftentimes DePin (depending on infrastructure)—offers a radically different approach to healthcare data management. Opening up access to healthcare data is important; however, Dr. Mitesh Rao, former Chief Patient Safety Officer at Stanford Healthcare and Founder and CEO of OMNY Health, does not view the potential loss of the TEFCA as a detrimental loss to the industry. In fact, Dr. Rao believes that TEFCA fell short in many ways, especially in efficiently organizing data for research-sharing purposes, which creates an opportunity for Web 3 to enter the chat.

    Unlike traditional centralized health information exchanges, Web3 technologies emphasize:

    • Decentralization: Eliminating single points of failure and reducing control by major healthcare entities.
    • Patient Sovereignty: Enabling individuals to own, control, and monetize their health data.
    • Security & Transparency: Using blockchain for immutable record-keeping and auditability.

    The Reality Check: Web3’s Readiness in Healthcare

    While Web3 presents a compelling alternative, several barriers stand in the way of widespread adoption in healthcare:

    1. Regulatory Uncertainty – The U.S. healthcare system is governed by stringent laws like HIPAA, which were designed for centralized models. Web3’s decentralized and pseudonymous nature poses legal and compliance challenges.
    2. Interoperability Issues – While TEFCA promotes standardization, Web3 solutions remain fragmented. Without a unified framework, integrating blockchain-based health data with legacy EHR systems is difficult.
    3. Adoption Hesitancy – Hospitals and insurers, entrenched in traditional systems, are slow to trust decentralized technologies. Many remain skeptical of blockchain’s ability to handle high-volume, real-time health data transactions.
    4. Data Ownership vs. Monetization – While Web3 empowers patients with control over their data, concerns arise around ethical monetization. Will selling personal health data introduce new inequalities, rather than solving existing ones, especially in considering many DeSci models and the funding mechanisms they propose.

    The vision behind TEFCA—a more open, accessible, and interoperable healthcare system—remains crucial. Yet, with political and regulatory shifts, its success is in jeopardy. This presents an opportunity for Web3 to step in, but only if critical challenges around compliance, interoperability, and trust are addressed.

    Web3 may not be fully ready to take over healthcare just yet, but with continued innovation, strategic partnerships, and regulatory evolution, it could become the key to unlocking a truly patient-centric health data economy.

  • RFK Jr. rolls back transparency policy on Medicaid and NIH changes

    RFK Jr. rolls back transparency policy on Medicaid and NIH changes

    Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ended a longstanding transparency rule on Friday, supercharging his authority to change policies in areas ranging from Medicaid to the National Institutes of Health without advance notice to the public.

    Dubbed the “Richardson Waiver” after the former health secretary who issued the rule in 1971, the policy Kennedy repealed had required regulations related to property, loans, grants, benefits or contracts to go through the federal “rulemaking” process.

    The law governing rulemaking usually exempts such regulations, but in response to calls at the time to close the exemption, officials voluntarily waived it. This meant that, until now, they would go through the process of notifying the public of their proposals and asking for comments before imposing changes. 

    “The extra-statutory obligations of the Richardson Waiver impose costs on the Department and the public, are contrary to the efficient operation of the Department, and impede the Department’s flexibility to adapt quickly to legal and policy mandates,” Kennedy said in a filing announcing the end of the waiver.

    Now health agencies no longer need to go through the notice and comment process for many policy changes about grants and benefits. This includes new rules that could otherwise be stymied by backlash during a public comment period, like potentially adding in work requirements to Medicaid or redrawing how the National Institutes of Health funds research.

    “It’s hugely important, because getting rid of the Richardson Waiver means that the agency can move a lot faster to implement big new policy changes,” said Samuel Bagenstos, professor of law at the University of Michigan.

    Bagenstos previously worked as the general counsel for HHS under the Biden administration. He said following the policy was a major hurdle, bogging down proposals that might have otherwise been finalized.

    “Courts have held HHS to that waiver, so it’s not just something they could ignore,” he said. “If you think about HHS, it’s a $1.7 trillion department. The overwhelming majority of what it does is grants and benefits.”

    The waiver was also cited earlier this month by state attorneys general as one argument in their legal challenge seeking to block the National Institutes of Health’s controversial cuts to research funding. They quoted the first Trump administration supporting the waiver in a 2020 post by the department to the Federal Register.

    “The Department believes that its decision-making ought to be as transparent as appropriate to better enable the citizenry to comment on its proposed rules and demonstration projects,” Trump HHS officials had said.

    The Council on Governmental Relations, a group that represents research universities and other institutions, criticized Kennedy’s decision Friday. The group’s president, Matt Owens, told CBS News in a statement that it “flies in the face of the Trump Administration’s professed mandate for greater transparency.”

    “For decades HHS policies affecting public health and research institutions have benefitted from public stakeholder participation in the policy process. Public input is an essential element of the policy process that reflects our nation’s democratic principles,” he said.

    Kennedy’s reversal does not end public comment for all changes tied to benefits overseen by the department. A separate law requires changes to Medicare coverage to go through public comment.

    Bagenstos predicted that Friday’s attempt to end the waiver would also be challenged, though he acknowledged Kennedy had the authority to seek to end it.

    “I think even the repeal will be challenged. I don’t think their announcement of it is the end of the story,” he said.