Just been to register at the local GP...

About 18 times yep.

One has to wonder, does he kick up the same fuss when asked for a postcode when hiring a car, or a mobile number when booking a hotel, all the while Facebook, WhatsApp and Google hold terabytes of information about all his conversations, purchase history, browsing habits, etc etc...
 
Cromulent;30483613 said:
Actually the NHS has already given some medical records to companies like Google.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...records-data-sharing-16-million-a7011891.html
Click to expand...

I hope those patients were at least asked, and at least given anonymity.

Well, yea if you believe them:

A spokesperson for The Royal Free London told The Independent: “Absolutely no patient-identifiable data is shared with Deep-Mind. All information sent to and processed by this app is encrypted and is only decrypted once returned to the clinician’s device. Patients can opt out of any data-sharing system by contacting the Trust’s data protection officer.”
Click to expand...
 
Fubsy;30483664 said:
Well, yea if you believe them:
Click to expand...

If the data is encrypted then the app wouldn't be able to process the data so Google MUST have access to the unencrypted data otherwise Deep Mind wouldn't have anything to process.

With the information Google has access too I wouldn't be surprised if they could take medical records with no names on them and the dates of certain medical procedures and compare it with peoples search history to find out who the person actually was.

Google can do some amazing things and I don't trust them at all. I still use Google though. More fool me.
 
Ryan0r;30483642 said:
About 18 times yep.

One has to wonder, does he kick up the same fuss when asked for a postcode when hiring a car, or a mobile number when booking a hotel, all the while Facebook, WhatsApp and Google hold terabytes of information about all his conversations, purchase history, browsing habits, etc etc...
Click to expand...

Most of that stuff is pretty harmless if it gets into the wrong hands, but I still minimise where I can what I record on social media. We're already all screwed on this side of things thanks to the Investigatory Powers Act.

Today was the day when someone asked me for sensitive information (I wouldn't want Dave down the pub to know any of it) and I asked the person "is it necessary to register me?", "how is it processed?" and "who can access it?" - all I got in response was "we just need it". I was surprised that I asked, I didn't plan to and now I'm wearing a tin foil hat.
 
Fubsy;30483731 said:
Most of that stuff is pretty harmless if it gets into the wrong hands, but I still minimise where I can what I record on social media. We're already all screwed on this side of things thanks to the Investigatory Powers Act.

Today was the day when someone asked me for sensitive information (I wouldn't want Dave down the pub to know any of it) and I asked the person "is it necessary to register me?", "how is it processed?" and "who can access it?" - all I got in response was "we just need it". I was surprised that I asked, I didn't plan to and now I'm wearing a tin foil hat.
Click to expand...

Live in a tent in the country and then you can quite truthfully say that you can't fill in the form :).
 
Cromulent;30483750 said:
Live in a tent in the country and then you can quite truthfully say that you can't fill in the form :).
Click to expand...

Ha, but then I wouldn't be able to fill the other form in truthfully ;)

Pretty much I have to give them this information and take it on blind faith it's not misused and protected properly. Safe to say I'm happy to do it knowing that none of you guys would have any issues with it.
 
Did you used to live in Australia? Big into your football? :p

Thought I'd have a poke through my notes about you....... ;)
 
Fubsy;30482524 said:
Well that's a better reason than I was given at the surgery. Why can't they give these reasons on the form? Instead of just "give us this info because we want it".

EDIT: Someone is going to tell me that it's because it's obvious and I'm just paranoid. I like to think it's more about being aware of who knows what, why do they know it and who will they tell?
Click to expand...

They won't give the reasons because they don't care. Society has changed a great deal in the last 15 years or so, from privacy as a default and a good thing to privacy as a special case to be met with suspicion and ridicule in every more circumstances. So data extraction for the sake of it is the norm, as is storing the data insecurely. Since privacy doesn't matter, the security of personal information doesn't matter either. Not unless it's a huge breach with laughable negligence that happens to get some media attention.

There's currently a slight fuss about TVs that monitor everything watched and everything spoken within recording distance. Just a slight fuss and just temporarily. It'll be normal in a few more years. A few more years after that it'll be something else. The extent and pace of change has been remarkable and continues to increase.

For example, I remember when most of the UK mainstream media strongly condemned the ruler of another country for spying on his own people with a network of CCTV cameras. Politicians spoke against it too. That was less than 30 years ago. Now the UK has an internal spy camera network far beyond the wildest dreams of that dictator. I remember when people and especially minors, were strongly advised to never use their real name online and never divulge personal information online. That was normal behaviour - almost everyone used a different name online and giving false names and other personal details to the few online sites that required them was normal and encouraged. That was less than 20 years ago.

The main thing Orwell got wrong regarding the surveillance in 1984 was that he assumed it would all be controlled by the state. In reality, a lot of it will be controlled by businesses. Like the TVs, for example, which are the first step in removing privacy inside people's homes. After all, a lot of crimes are committed or planned inside homes. Obviously anyone who objects to routine blanket surveillance of everyone in their own homes must have something very bad to hide. That's the same line that's been used so successfully so far, so it'll continue to be used.
 
Fubsy;30483604 said:
Nothing, but I know these are not passed on to third parties outside the NHS (I hope).
Click to expand...

You know wrong.

NHS medical records are routinely passed on to third parties outside the NHS (and outside the UK).

They might or might not pretend that the records are anonymous. The records are not anonymous. The whole "anonymous data" thing is always just a facade. It just changes how obvious the people's identities are and how trivial it is to find them. At most "anonymous" might mean that at least some of the people with access to the data wouldn't consider it worth finding the identities. Or it might mean nothing at all apart from that the people saying it consider it worth lying about.
 
I don't see why the GP surgery should require the information for registration, yes it is useful to know, but any pertinent questions can be asked during a consultation rather than using outdated information on a form the patient filled in 5 years ago. It seems unethical to deny medical treatment on the basis of not answering such questions.
 
Angilion;30485100 said:
You know wrong.

NHS medical records are routinely passed on to third parties outside the NHS (and outside the UK).

They might or might not pretend that the records are anonymous. The records are not anonymous. The whole "anonymous data" thing is always just a facade. It just changes how obvious the people's identities are and how trivial it is to find them. At most "anonymous" might mean that at least some of the people with access to the data wouldn't consider it worth finding the identities. Or it might mean nothing at all apart from that the people saying it consider it worth lying about.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that the NHS wilfully breaches the DPA and GDPR?
 
Fubsy;30482385 said:
They will not accept my completed GMS1 form alone. They want me to fill in a further health questionnaire (things like email address, phone number, work number, family members at address, how much I drink/smoke, ethnicity etc).

I don't want to give them this information, and have asked them if they require it, which they replied with a categorical yes, but were unable to explain why other than it is. I normally don't mind this sort of thing when it's required (such as the GMS1 form, or as part of a pre-op) however this extra stuff I always see as optional. There are reasons why I don't want to give this information, nothing dodgy, but that isn't the point of this thread.

Has anyone had this when registering at a GP?
Click to expand...
GP surgeries are private businesses and we can see who we like. You don't like it then register where else ;-)
 
The_Abyss;30485213 said:
Are you suggesting that the NHS wilfully breaches the DPA and GDPR?
Click to expand...

I'm saying they don't matter. It's "anonymous" data, i.e. not really anonymous but treated as such.

Although maybe the NHS does openly breach the DPA and GDPR (whatever that is). Who'd care and could do anything about it?
 
Energize;30485184 said:
I don't see why the GP surgery should require the information for registration, yes it is useful to know, but any pertinent questions can be asked during a consultation rather than using outdated information on a form the patient filled in 5 years ago.
Click to expand...

Yes, I can't see a better use of a GP's consulting time than verifying email addresses, phone numbers and ethnicity each time a person comes in for an appointment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom