Online language resources amplify their reach merely, increasing their chances of actually finding useful information this way. Instead of counting on the neighbour’s cousin anecdote, people is now able to learn from the personal experiences of large numbers of other folks with their same condition within an environment where doctors can actually moderate the conversation. This freedom to share and receive info has, however, the downside of creating large sums of available info. It is up to sufferers to carefully filtration system what they browse and compare it with the tips of doctors to fully benefit from this new resource. Why criticism against on-line health communities is not that grave Several people like to preach against these ‘fresh’ phenomenon of consumer generated health content.Inside our iPhone-reverent age, the dismissal of EHR critics as Luddites is certainly supported by the recognition that technology we once couldn’t imagine we now can’t live without. But the assumption that EHR development will mirror the cell phone’s trajectory offers three notable flaws. The EHR is touted as a cost-saving, quality-promoting device, though cost-conserving projections have already been debunked and data on quality are blended.2 Although we’ve made progress in patient safety only by carefully examining our mistakes, the risks posed by technology are anticipated to right themselves somehow. Second, letting the marketplace shape usability assumes that clinicians are the focus on users. So EHRs will be just as good as the quality metrics they’re designed to catch; technology can’t get over fundamental measurement problems.