Daily Archives: June 4, 2008

Study secretly tracks cell phone users


BY SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science WriterWed

Researchers secretly tracked the locations of 100,000 people outside the United States through their cell phone use and concluded that most people rarely stray more than a few miles from home.

The first-of-its-kind study by Northeastern University raises privacy and ethical questions for its monitoring methods, which would be illegal in the United States.

It also yielded somewhat surprising results that reveal how little people move around in their daily lives. Nearly three-quarters of those studied mainly stayed within a 20-mile-wide circle for half a year.

The scientists would not say where the study was done, only describing the location as an industrialized nation.

Researchers used cell phone towers to track individuals’ locations whenever they made or received phone calls and text messages over six months. In a second set of records, researchers took another 206 cell phones that had tracking devices in them and got records for their locations every two hours over a week’s time period.

The study was based on cell phone records from a private company, whose name also was not disclosed.

Study co-author Cesar Hidalgo, a physics researcher at Northeastern, said he and his colleagues didn’t know the individual phone numbers because they were disguised into “ugly” 26-digit-and-letter codes.

That type of nonconsensual tracking would be illegal in the United States, according to Rob Kenny, a spokesman for the Federal Communications Commission. Consensual tracking, however, is legal and even marketed as a special feature by some U.S. cell phone providers.

The study, published Thursday in the journal Nature, opens up the field of human-tracking for science and calls attention to what experts said is an emerging issue of locational privacy.

“This is a new step for science,” said study co-author Albert-Lazlo Barabasi, director of Northeastern’s Center for Complex Network Research. “For the first time we have a chance to really objectively follow certain aspects of human behavior.”

Barabasi said he spent nearly half his time on the study worrying about privacy issues. Researchers didn’t know which phone numbers were involved. They were not able to say precisely where people were, just which nearby cell phone tower was relaying the calls, which could be a matter of blocks or miles. They started with 6 million phone numbers and chose the 100,000 at random to provide “an extra layer” of anonymity for the research subjects, he said.

Barabasi said he did not check with any ethics panel. Hidalgo said they were not required to do so because the experiment involved physics, not biology. However, had they done so, they might have gotten an earful, suggested bioethicist Arthur Caplan at the University of Pennsylvania.

“There is plenty going on here that sets off ethical alarm bells about privacy and trustworthiness,” Caplan said.

Studies done on normal behavior at public places is “fair game for researchers” as long as no one can figure out identities, Caplan said in an e-mail.

“So if I fight at a soccer match or walk through 30th Street train station in Philly, I can be studied,” Caplan wrote. “But my cell phone is not public. My cell phone is personal. Tracking it and thus its owner is an active intrusion into personal privacy.”

Paul Stephens, policy director at the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse in San Diego, said the nonconsensual part of the study raises the Big Brother issue.

“It certainly is a major concern for people who basically don’t like to be tracked and shouldn’t be tracked without their knowledge,” Stephens said.

Study co-author Hidalgo said there is a difference between being a statistic — such as how many people buy a certain brand of computer — and a specific example. The people tracked in the study are more statistics than examples.

“In the wrong hands the data could be misused,” Hidalgo said. “But in scientists’ hands you’re trying to look at broad patterns…. We’re not trying to do evil things. We’re trying to make the world a little better.”

Knowing people’s travel patterns can help design better transportation systems and give doctors guidance in fighting the spread of contagious diseases, he said.

The results also tell us something new about ourselves, including that we tend to go to the same places repeatedly, he said.

“Despite the fact that we think of ourselves as spontaneous and unpredictable … we do have our patterns we move along and for the vast majority of people it’s a short distance,” Barabasi said.

The study found that nearly half of the people in the study pretty much keep to a circle little more than six miles wide and that 83 percent of the people tracked mostly stay within a 37-mile wide circle.

But then there are the people who are the travel equivalent of the super-rich, said Hidalgo, who travels more than 150 miles every weekend to visit his girlfriend. Nearly 3 percent of the population regularly go beyond a 200-mile wide circle. Less than 1 percent of people travel often out of a 621-mile circle.

But most people like to stay much closer to home. Hidalgo said he understands why: “There’s a lot of people who don’t like hectic lives. Travel is such a hassle.”

___

On the Net:

Nature: http://www.nature.com/nature

Walgreen Settles $35 million dollar whistleblower suit


Walgreen Co. has agreed to pay $35 million to settle claims that from 2001 to 2005, it improperly switched patients to different versions of the prescriptions drugs Ranitidine, Fluoxetine and Eldepryl in order to increase its reimbursement from Medicaid, the U.S. Justice Department announced today.

The Walgreens settlement will resolve a whistleblower action filed in 2003 by Bernard Listiza, a licensed pharmacist in Washington, D.C. The federal share of the settlement is approximately $18.6 million. Forty-six states, including Wisconsin, and Puerto Rico will share approximately $16.4 million under separate settlement agreements. Lisitza will receive approximately $5 million as his share of the federal and state settlements.

The amounts to be paid to each state were not disclosed. Walgreens has dozens of pharmacies in the Milwaukee area.

According to the Justice Department, Walgreens, which operates more than 5,000 retail pharmacies throughout the U.S., switched the prescriptions for Medicaid patients who were prescribed tablets of Ranitidine to more expensive capsules; prescriptions for capsules of Fluoxetine to more expensive tablets; and prescriptions for tablets of Eldepryl to more expensive capsules. By switching the form of the drug dispensed to Medicaid patients, Walgreens substantially increased its reimbursement from Medicaid while providing no additional medical benefit to patients.

“This is our third settlement with a company that has engaged in improper drug switching, and it represents the government’s continuing commitment to vigorously pursue fraud in government health care programs,” said Gregory Katsas, Acting Assisting Attorney General for the Civil Division. “The United States will not tolerate pharmacies or any other health care providers that attempt to manipulate the Medicaid program at the taxpayers’ expense.”

Listiza was also involved as a whistleblower that resulted in the March 2008 settlement by Woonsocket, R.I.-based CVS Caremark Corp., which agreed to pay $36.7 million in a case similar to the Walgreens case.

Deerfield, Ill.-based Walgreens (NYSE: WAG) has also entered into a compliance agreement with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to insure that Walgreens does not improperly switch drugs in the future. The compliance agreement will be in effect for five years.