Re: "if each person had control of who has access"
Believe it or not, this type of application is one of the great hopes for Blockchain. The important concept here is that "each person" has control, not a central authority. This is particularly relavent in Healthcare. There's even a peer-reviewed journal on the subject: Blockchain in Healthcare Today.
Forget about Bitcoin mining and ICOs. Permissioned distributed systems allow partipating members to grant secure access to assets, and it doesn't require massive computing power. One emerging standard for managing these types of business transactions is Hyperledger.
Hope that makes sense and helps.
Thanks for your response. I spent some time looking at Blockchain as a solution but fail to see how it solves the problem of data ownership/portability. By definition, Blockchain is a distributed technology in which each instance of the software maintains a copy of all records. When a new record is added, Blockchain processes (mines) the record and validate its place in history. No where does it provide a solution for ownership.
At the root of it, Blockchain is software on a database. So if I stick my healthcare document on a database that is distributed, not only do I lose ownership of that document, but it is copied several times over to other databases.
And I understand that there are some forms of Blockchain that are considered private and are designed to handle these types of situations. But data can be decrypted.
I should have been clearer. I am not saying that the Blockchain ledger would replace existing databases. Blockchain for access control would allow an application to determine if a participant has access (authentication, e.g. via encrypted credentials or a certificate) and could also include authorization information (what information can be seen).
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
We strive for transparency and don't collect excess data.