Forums | MacLife

As someone taking medical coding in school, who lives with a medical coder, who has connections to two nurses (one ER, one administrative), and who's former brother in law is chief of security in a hospital, in general medical records are considered very confidental. If this is even vaguely true someone at that hospital is losing their job. Additionally, the WSJ opened themselves to a lawsuit whether it's true or not. If it's not, they can get sued on the basis of libel and attempting to manipulate Apple's stocks. If it's true, they can get sued on the pretext of locating the source of the leak.

Freedom of the press and confidentiality of sources, too. And it's not all new.

Apple's CEO and cofounder hopes to put his health problems behind him

Founding one of tech industry's biggest players -- Apple -- and personally turning the company around in the late nineties was nothing compared to the challenge that Apple CEO Steve Jobs faced in 2004.  Battling a rare and deadly form of pancreatic cancer, Mr. Jobs recovered thanks to surgery and reassumed his leadership role at the company, integrally helping to conceive, develop and release hit products such as the iPhone and MacBook Air.

Last year, though, many observers took note that Mr. Jobs looked sickly at public appearances.  Sure enough, in January of this year he took medical leave, announcing he would be gone from Apple on medical leave until the end of June.  In his absence Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook took over many of the day to day duties.

Now details of Mr. Jobs' medical battle, veiled in secrecy, have at last emerged.  According to a report by the Wall Street Journal Mr. Jobs received a liver transplant in Tennessee two months ago.  Mr. Jobs had earlier this year had relocated from California to Tennessee, a state known for having a shorter waiting list for organ transplants.  At the time Bloomberg had reported that Mr. Jobs was applying for a liver transplant.

Apple spokespeople contacted by the WSJ to seek confirmation of the sourced reports refused to comment, merely reiterating that Apple "continues to look forward to returning at the end of June, and there's nothing further to say."  According to the WSJ report, COO Cook may take over additional roles to help Mr. Jobs during his recovery.

Earlier this year it was discovered that Mr. Jobs was receiving hormone therapy.  Reportedly he was unable to digest food properly and receive nutrients.  The liver is an integral part of hormone production, and also produces bile, needed for digestion.  The liver is very sensitive to toxins, and can be damaged by chemotherapy, which Mr. Jobs likely received during his cancer treatment.

Report: Apple's Steve Jobs Received Liver Transplant and is Recovering

I am home.

Sci's gaming gear tops out around Peggle-capable, and his house exactly isn't Babe Central. So, lacking other info...

...not really the best place to spend Sat. nite.

All I Need is Love, but I'll settle for Halo, GoW etc. Peggle...mm... doubtful.

(Freecell, now... )

There'd need to be more at home like her for it to work for me if the former doesn't work out.

Kool-Aid Guzzler wrote:

Bat wrote:

I speak not of the source of the info. Apple should've been more forthcoming, at least about the general nature and seriousness, since it does have a bearing on the market. To many, Steve is the company.

Instead, Apple and Steve seem to have concealed, excessively. Detailed records were not needed.

To many, the president of the small, local company where I work "is" the company too.  Should he be required to disclose his medical records too?

So, you'd be okay if he had dramatic weight loss and took six months off without explanation?

Kool-Aid Guzzler wrote:

Gatchaman wrote:

So, you'd be okay if he had dramatic weight loss and took six months off without explanation?

Oh - did SJ leave without explanation?  I guess I didn't understand that clearly

Yes, I would expect the president of our small company to explain that he was taking a medical leave, but I would not expect him to divulge anything beyond that.  It is private.

Exactly, people tend to forget that.

Kool-Aid Guzzler wrote:

Gatchaman wrote:

So, you'd be okay if he had dramatic weight loss and took six months off without explanation?

Oh - did SJ leave without explanation?  I guess I didn't understand that clearly

Yes, I would expect the president of our small company to explain that he was taking a medical leave, but I would not expect him to divulge anything beyond that.  It is private.

Is your company a publically-held corporation, i.e. issuing stocks to investors? If so, then your company's president has a fiscal duty to report to his company's investors. No, he does not have to post his medical records publically, but if he is facing a serious medical condition such as one requiring a liver transplant then that information should be disclosed. This is the case even in publically-held companies where the boss isn't "the company."

In Jobs' case it was not. As I recall he was "going on sabbatical" to take care of "some" medical problems--the implications that were made by Apple did not disclose that he might undergo something potentially life-threatening as any major surgery is, much less an organ transplant. If you had been a potential investor looking at Apple just prior to Jobs' limited announcement near the end of 2008, wouldn't you want to know that there was the possibility that Jobs might be dead from a botched surgery or other complications that could arise from an organ transplant?

I suspect that there will be an SEC investigation where the hierarchy in Apple will have to testify of what they knew when.

ukimalefu wrote:

Hospital Confirms Steve Jobs's Transplant, Denies He Received Preferential Treatment

With Steve Jobs's consent, the Memphis hospital that conducted his liver transplant two months ago issued a statement denying he received any special treatment, classifying him as "the sickest person on the waiting list."

bullsmurf.
Just like our justice system, the rich get their own line in health care.

Kool-Aid Guzzler wrote:

Bat wrote:

I speak not of the source of the info. Apple should've been more forthcoming, at least about the general nature and seriousness, since it does have a bearing on the market. To many, Steve is the company.

Instead, Apple and Steve seem to have concealed, excessively. Detailed records were not needed.

To many, the president of the small, local company where I work "is" the company too.  Should he be required to disclose his medical records too?

Kool-Aid Guzzler wrote:

Gatchaman wrote:

So, you'd be okay if he had dramatic weight loss and took six months off without explanation?

Oh - did SJ leave without explanation?  I guess I didn't understand that clearly

Yes, I would expect the president of our small company to explain that he was taking a medical leave, but I would not expect him to divulge anything beyond that.  It is private.

A certain Mr. Buffet begs to differ. I understand he knows something of these things.

June 24 (Bloomberg) -- Apple Inc. and its board should have disclosed to investors that Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs had a liver transplant while on medical leave, billionaire investor Warren Buffett said.

“Certainly Steve Jobs is important to Apple,” Buffett, chairman and chief executive officer of Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc. said in an interview today on CNBC. “Whether he is facing serious surgery or not is a material fact.”

Jobs, who went on medical leave in January, is recovering well from a liver transplant and has an “excellent prognosis,” Dr. James Eason, chief of transplantation at the Methodist University Hospital Transplant Institute in Memphis, Tennessee, said yesterday in a statement. While Eason’s statement didn’t specify when he had the surgery, Jobs had the transplant about two months ago, a person familiar with the matter said.

“If I have any serious illness, or something coming up of an important nature, an operation or anything like that, I think the thing to do is just tell -- the Berkshire shareholders about it. I work for them,” said Buffett, 78. “They’re going to find out about it anyway, so I don’t see a big privacy issue or anything of the sort.”

Steve Dowling, a spokesman for Cupertino, California-based Apple, declined to comment on Buffett’s remarks.

Apple Should Have Disclosed Jobs’s Transplant, Buffett Says

Reports are Steve is back at work, some days in office, some home.