“Mostly though, I think I don’t like your ‘lamenting’ of blogger’s actions.”

Well, we’ll just have to disagree on that one, then. That comment isn’t just from this incident, but rather something that I’ve felt for years, and it is my considered opinion. I feel that more misinformation than information has been spread through these periodic outcries and outrages in the blogosphere.

I really like this quote by Clay Shirky (about the #amazonfail incident):

Though the event initially triggered enormous moral outrage, evidence that it didn’t actually happen didn’t quell that outrage. Moral judgment is harder to reverse than other, less emotional forms; when an event precipitates the cleansing anger of righteousness, admitting you were mistaken feels dirty. As a result, there can be an enormous premium put on finding rationales for continuing to feel aggrieved, should the initial rationale disappear. Call it ‘conservation of outrage.’

Mostly though, I think I don’t like your ‘lamenting’ of blogger’s actions. Even if it’s overstated, this is definitely an issue that deserves the attention. You might be understating what someone can do with information that gets slipped, or the information that’s readily available.

And even beyond that, you mention that the law has some pretty obvious flaws, so…again, the outrage comes from where?

That’s a good question. Fortunately, the law spells out the categories. Most of the histograms are 1-dimensional, and none have more than 2 or 3 variables. And the multi-dimensional ones look pretty innocous, like (age, marital status, race). This is for the whole state, not on a county-by-county basis.

Do you know how broad these categories are? If they are releasing a multidimensional histogram of values, and several of the bins contain just a few people, it could still be a re-identification risk.

“So a FOIA request is all you need and then you CAN get all this data and put it online, right?”

The law specifically states that the information is exempt from the Oklahoma Open Records Act (the FOIA doesn’t apply here since the data isn’t being held by the federal government).

“And the Dept. of Health is not staffed by religious persons who might misuse the data, or “leak” it, right?”

I have no opinion on that. I already said I’m not defending the law. Could you please try to understand that fact? I’m only saying that the claim about re-identifability doesn’t check out.

“Just because they ARE DEFINITELY going to release aggregate reports (Section 7) DOESN’T mean they aren’t going to release INDIVIDUAL reports, which they consider would not “reasonably lead to the identification of any individual female”.”

That may be true, I don’t know; it’s for lawyers to figure out. But again, it is beside my point, which is that the public outrage has been premised on the interpretation that the law mandates the release of individual records.

“Special interest groups? Where have you been for the last decade of government encroachment? Trying to stop government from intimidating patients and physicians is not a special interest group.”

Holy crap, you need a dictionary Wikipedia. That is in fact exactly what special interest group means.

And the Dept. of Health is not staffed by religious persons who might misuse the data, or “leak” it, right?

And, incidentally, you may be reading it wrong. You’re referring to Section 7, while Section 5 merely says they won’t include name, address, or information “specifically identifying” any patient/female. Just because they ARE DEFINITELY going to release aggregate reports (Section 7) DOESN’T mean they aren’t going to release INDIVIDUAL reports, which they consider would not “reasonably lead to the identification of any individual female”.

The ONLY reason for the gov’t to have this info is either to act on it or publicize it. When have you ever seen expanding bureaucracy NOT misuse its power?

“But I do want to lament the fact that bloggers and special interest groups can start a controversy based on a careless (or less often, deliberate) misunderstanding”

Special interest groups? Where have you been for the last decade of government encroachment? Trying to stop government from intimidating patients and physicians is not a special interest group.