Connect with us


HealthLedger – Blockchain-Based Electronic Health Record Exchange Platform



HealthLedger is working to revolutionize the way healthcare operates at the ground level. Traditionally, healthcare has remained expensive because many operational costs are redundant. Questionnaires filled out for each clinic, charts reviewed and tests re-ordered, and that’s just the icing on the cake.

Blockchain technology can do more than just save everyone money, it can also help prevent improper access to health records via blockchain rights management. Time is money, right? Well, blockchain can even save time spent faxing, scanning, and sending documents. Think of blockchain like a filing cabinet—except every office that is connected has all of the files simultaneously.

HealthLedger uses the HyperLedger framework to place health records on the blockchain. By working with a pre-established framework, the team behind HealthLedger has access to solutions developed by an open-source coding community. They can adapt others’ work to suit their needs without fighting over who owns what.

They will upload records to a permissioned blockchain that is shared with clinics in their network worldwide. Currently, medical practices have to record information from patients, obtain new patient paperwork, carry out any tests they don’t have a record for, and much more.

With a solution like HealthLedger, however, clinics, hospitals, and doctors can all share information more quickly, easily, and safely. They simply upload patient files to the blockchain and other offices will have access to the records at will, so long as they have been granted access.

What can it change?

Emerging technology is always promised as a cure-all for the world’s issues. The real trouble with changing the world is under-promising and over-delivering so that people consistently know you will follow-through. Blockchain can help with many issues in healthcare, but it will not fix everything wrong with the industry.

Issues HealthLedger may be able to solve:

  • Data security
  • Time efficiency
  • Data errors
  • Customer Experience (HIPAA constraints on phone-based lab result delivery)
  • High cost of operations (and thus treatment)
  • Paper waste

How can HealthLedger solve them?

  • Data security is improved by putting information in a shared database with very specific permissions, limited access, and other controls like MAC Address whitelisting can be implemented as well.
  • Time efficiency is improved by sharing files into a common set of locations, so other offices have access to them readily.
  • Data errors are reduced by allowing physicians and technicians to focus more on their tasks at hand than worrying about filing the charts and results away.
  • Patients no longer have to come into the office to retrieve their lab results or other test results. The information can be shared securely using a blockchain-based decentralized application (dApp).
  • Operational costs can be reduced through time savings and increased work efficiency, which should result in cheaper costs of medical visits.
  • Paper waste can be lessened by taking notes on tablets and PCs, then uploading them directly to the blockchain.

How might it impact the consumer experience?

Consumers may experience lower costs for their treatment, shorter visits to medical offices. Customers struggle against expensive medical visits and lengthy questionnaires—not to mention long lines in busier cities—everytime they need to get a check-up or need assistance.

What services do they currently have in the works?

HealthLedger does not seem to have a publicly available GitHub repository. There are two other projects, one is developing a blockchain-based system for tracking organ donations, preventing medical abuse of incapacitated patients, and preventing organ trafficking. The HealthLedger project in question, however, is working to put all health-based records on the blockchain.

If you’d like to know more about HealthLedger, you can view their website. They do not have a public whitepaper, yellowpaper (technical document), or business plan at this time.


Subscribe to stay up to date with the latest blockchain innovation in healthcare.



Uniswap’s $40M Governance Vote Closes on Halloween and Some UNI Holders Fear for Price



Should users who interacted with Uniswap through a third-party interface be entitled to the free UNI tokens other users received on Sept. 17?

That’s the question at the center of a dispute currently taking place in Uniswap governance channels. The second-ever proposal to come before the Uniswap community would distribute airdropped UNI tokens to another 12,619 addresses, ahead of a second proposal set for nearly 27,000 addresses.

As of this writing, over 20.7 million UNI have been voted in favor of the proposal and more than 714,000 have been voted against. The vote closes on Oct. 31 at roughly 8:00 AM UTC.

While the vote may look extremely lopsided at the moment, the proposal will fail if less than 40 million UNI vote, establishing a quorum. The key obstacle to passage is probably reaching that threshold. 

The decision is widely interesting enough to the crypto community that it’s inspired a betting market on Polymarket, which currently leans toward the pitch for further UNI distributions failing.

If both proposals succeed, however, an additional 15,679,200 UNI would be distributed from the existing treasury, worth approximately $40.6 million, at the current price of $2.59 per UNI. Of that, 5,047,600 UNI would be redistributed from the treasury in phase one.

400 UNI, 40,000 more times

When the company behind Ethereum’s leading automated market maker, Uniswap, announced its governance token, UNI, in September, it surprised everyone by giving away 400 UNI to all wallets that had ever even used the decentralized application. Directly, that is.

At the time, each airdrop was worth well over $1,000.

Read more: Uniswap’s Distribution Is Built on Something That Can’t Be Forked: Actual Users

As a governance token, each UNI can be used to vote on decisions about changes to the dapp and also on expenditures from the Uniswap treasury, which has a supply of 430 million UNI or 43% of the initial supply.

The proposal under consideration now, and the one that will follow, concerns giving the airdrop to people who missed out on the gravy train through a technicality.

These individuals interacted with Uniswap using third-party software that enabled the transaction, touching Uniswap by way of a proxy contract. That made each of their wallets invisible to Uniswap itself. As the proponents of the proposal have argued: If decentralized finance (DeFi) is about money legos, what message does it send if only users of the base lego get the free crypto?

The current proposal centers on users who interacted with Uniswap via 10 different dapps – the largest being MyEtherWallet (MEW), Argent and Dharma, in that order.

Phase two involves users who interacted with Uniswap via decentralized exchange (DEX) aggregators. Five DEX aggregators represent 26,598 accounts, with the largest by far on the Kyber Network.

Lots of talk

The idea of a retroactive airdrop was raised almost as soon as UNI was announced by Nadav Hollander, CEO of DeFi portal Dharma. Hollander has said that as soon as people started receiving UNI, Dharma users began saying they were missing out.

“Ultimately the crux of the argument we are making is that the status quo has sort of negatively punished developers who took risks building on top of Uniswap,” Nadav Hollarnder of Dharma said during a group discussion hosted by Chris Blec, on his YouTube show, Thought Bubble.

In a Twitter thread, Uniswap founder Hayden Adams acknowledged the team was aware that some users might feel left out. That’s why Uniswap decided to leave future decisions about further distributions to UNI holders, Adams said, in part because it is hard to distinguish actual users from the many bots who also use Uniswap at a remove.

Additionally, there’s no way to know how many users of the 15 applications listed on the governance proposals may have already received the airdrop because of interacting with Uniswap directly through another wallet.

SpankChain CEO and MolochDAO summoner Ameen Soleimani wrote on the Uniswap forum that the proposal illustrates what a dangerous time-suck governance disputes can become.

“The outcome is also fairly zero-sum,” Soleimani wrote, adding: 

“1) it doesn’t create any wealth for UNI holders, it 2) takes UNI from the treasury that could be spent on other things and 3) gives it to folks who will likely sell it, probably having a small negative price impact.”

The debate has caused an emerging class of protocol politicians to weigh in on the matter.”I would like to see this gigantic stimulus package-like situation, where we are going to fund 15 or 20 different projects, to be reframed like a development grant on an individual basis,” one such blockchain populist, Hiturunk, leader of the Penguin Party, said during the call with Hollander.



Continue Reading


Binance Might Delist Many Low-Volume Coins Soon, CZ Hints



Binance is the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange by means of daily trading volumes. In the few short years since its launch, the venue went on to become a leading company in the industry.

In fact, launching coins up for trade on the exchange has created the so-called “Binance Effect.” In short, when a cryptocurrency is selected and launched for trading on the platform, its price usually undergoes a substantial surge.

Now, the CEO of Binance, Changpeng Zhao, has hinted that it may start delisting low-volume coins.

Low-Volume Coins May Kiss Binance Goodbye

In an interesting Twitter thread, a popular cryptocurrency analyst and trader RookieXBT suggested delisting all coins on Binance that “do less than 10 BTC of daily volume.”

Expectedly or not, the CEO of the exchange engaged in the thread, providing a hint that they might consider doing so.

“I think it is a good idea. If you are on Binance and still have no volume, then…” – Said CZ, perhaps hinting that there’s something inherently wrong with coins listed on Binance and failing to generate big daily volume.

Naturally, there are two sides to this debate. Some users think that the merits of a coin shouldn’t be valued based on the volumes it generates on cryptocurrency exchanges. People argue that they hold a coin for the long-term and don’t really care about the daily volume.

This is most definitely true. The inherent merits of a cryptocurrency are most definitely not associated with it being listed on a certain exchange, be it Binance. So, a logical question pops – why would someone care if the coin is listed or not, presuming they are “in it for the technology”? And this is where things take a twist.

The Other Side of the Story

At this point, it becomes rather clear that this particular narrative doesn’t stand on solid ground because people are obviously concerned about the price, perhaps even more so than the technology itself.

If an investor is holding a cryptocurrency for the long run, it being listed on Binance shouldn’t make a difference. But that’s usually not the case – people are rarely “in it for the technology” despite what they might claim.

The main concern is that if Binance decides to delist low-volume cryptocurrencies en-masse, this might cause a larger upset in the market because of the “Binance Effect.”

As we mentioned before, when a cryptocurrency is listed on Binance, it usually goes through a substantial increase. However, the opposite is also true. Last year, the exchange delisted Bitcoin SV, and it tanked more than 10% on the news. That’s just one example.

In any case, there’s no formal confirmation, and it remains interesting to see whether the exchange will really start delisting coins based on low volumes.

Featured image courtesy of Medium


Binance Futures 50 USDT FREE Voucher: Use this link to register & get 10% off fees and 50 USDT when trading 500 USDT (limited offer).


Continue Reading


Fidelity’s Crypto Subsidiary Targets Asian Investors To Buy Bitcoin



  • Fidelity Digital Asset Services (FDAS) has partnered with Stack Funds to enable Asian investors to purchase and store cryptocurrency assets more freely and securely. 
  • Based in Singapore, Stack Funds is a regulated fund manager focusing on Bitcoin and other digital assets.
  • According to the Bloomberg report, Stack Funds will make Fidelity’s secure custody services available to its clients, primarily based in Asia. The company outlined that the Asian market has been continuously growing in demand towards the cryptocurrency industry, especially from high-net-worth investors and family offices.
  • Stack further explained that all assets under its management will be audited monthly. The firm will provide insurance coverage, weekly contributions, and redemptions to enhance capital security.  
  • Stack’s co-founder, Michael Collett, said that Fidelity’s involvement will enable its company to attract even more investors from the region. 
  • On the other hand, Christopher Tyrer, head of Fidelity Digital Assets Europe, believes that “there’s a critical need for platforms which have a deep understanding of what local and regional investors are looking for.” However, he admitted that the digital asset space has “historically lacked” such platforms. 
  • After its success in the US, Fidelity Digital Assets expanded its cryptocurrency services to Europe last year. The company aims at entering the Asian market as well now with the Stack Funds partnership. 

Binance Futures 50 USDT FREE Voucher: Use this link to register & get 10% off fees and 50 USDT when trading 500 USDT (limited offer).


Continue Reading