Tech giants moving into health may widen inequalities and harm research, unless people can access and share their data, warn John T. Wilbanks and Eric J. Topol.

John T. Wilbanks & Eric J. Topol, Nature 535, 345–348 (21 July 2016) doi:10.1038/535345a

Nature-Comment OPEN

Citizens worldwide have too long a history of being passive players in health care — blindly following instructions from providers. And studies that have tracked reactions to revelations about global surveillance programmes suggest that most people are resigned to the idea that ownership and control of personal information is incompatible with the Internet age.

Yet just as social networking has rocketed around the world in a decade, a worldwide knowledge resource could soon be used to identify the best course of treatment for an individual on the basis of the experiences of millions. This resource will never be built unless each of us takes responsibility for our own health and disease, and for the information that we can generate about ourselves. When it comes to control over our own data, health data must be where we draw the line.

Drug screening: Drug repositioning needs a rethink

Xianting Ding, Nature 535, 355 (21 July 2016) doi:10.1038/535355d  Published online 20 July 2016

Repurposing drugs to treat illnesses for which they were not originally intended can be faster and cheaper than developing new ones. Disease is often an integration of multiple pathologies, so these are potentially treatable with different drug combinations that act in synergy.

For commercial reasons, pharmaceutical firms tend to dismiss reposition testing of drugs that are off patent. I therefore suggest that governments step in to fund the repurposing of established drugs to broaden the search.