Jump to content

Recommended Posts

UNLESS you opt out. If you don?t want your data to be shared outside the NHS, you have to fill in this form and take it to your GP before 23rd June.


See FT today: ?England?s NHS is preparing to scrape the medical histories of 55m patients, including sensitive information on mental and sexual health, criminal records and abuse, into a database it will share with third parties.?

Note there are *two* opt outs, one is the national level and one is the GP level.


https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/data-collections-and-data-sets/data-collections/general-practice-data-for-planning-and-research#opting-out


National Data Opt out - https://your-data-matters.service.nhs.uk/.

GP Level - See https://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/our-work/keeping-patient-data-safe/how-we-look-after-your-health-and-care-information/your-information-choices/opting-out-of-sharing-your-confidential-patient-information#type-1-opt-out-medical-records-held-at-your-gp-practice. You have to provide a form directly to your GP, this cannot currently be done online (I assume because the practice has to decide to send the data or not).


A few links on the NHS site seem to have changed this morning, so these may or may not continue to work. Perhaps there are moves afoot to publicise this better or even move the opt out to online. Surely the last thing GP practices need is millions of paper forms to process.

Thank you so much for alerting us to this. Forms printed off!




FredCasa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> UNLESS you opt out. If you don?t want your data to

> be shared outside the NHS, you have to fill in

> this form and take it to your GP before 23rd June.

>

>

> See FT today: ?England?s NHS is preparing to

> scrape the medical histories of 55m patients,

> including sensitive information on mental and

> sexual health, criminal records and abuse, into a

> database it will share with third parties.?

I?ve done no research into this but by ?your data? I think they mean using annomynized stats on health against various variables and data mining it to increase insights into health, demographics datamining for insight to improve health provision and service, Rather than your actual personal information being passed on.


It?s actually the sort of thing the NHS should be doing using it unique and massive data to look for patterns, say finding correlation between disease and conditions that we didn?t know about. A good thing.

Reading the privacy notice a number of thing raises question marks, notably that an emergency (pandemic)supersedes elements of that notice...quite what that means not sure but would like to be clearer.


It seems that unless you opt out you are giving over rather more than just anonymised data, your name, address, DOB.


Data is held in the cloud in secure servers in the EEC. Again, not sure of implications of that.


If you use the 119 service to book or change jabs a phone advisory seems to suggest you give permission to whoever is running that service (NHS subcontractor) to "access your health records".


No doubt all intentions here are as pure as the driven snow with only the interests of health and social research and public interest at the heart.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/30/the-guardian-view-on-medical-records-nhs-data-grab-needs-explaining


Think this deserves much greater scrutiny. NHS patient records are a data goldmine...It is stated patient records would not be used solely for commercial purposes. That says it all.

First Mate wrote on May 26, 05:48PM


> It seems that unless you opt out

> you are giving over rather more

> than just anonymised data, your name,

> address, DOB.


What's your source for your information that name, address and DOB may be passed on?


Does your "rather more than" refer to "just anonymised data, your name, address, DOB"? If so, what is the "more"?

ianr, suggest you read articles, as linked to in other posts, above. They explain implications/concerns better than I.


ianr Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> First Mate wrote on May 26, 05:48PM

>

> > It seems that unless you opt out

> > you are giving over rather more

> > than just anonymised data, your name,

> > address, DOB.

>

> What's your source for your information that name,

> address and DOB may be passed on?

>

> Does your "rather more than" refer to "just

> anonymised data, your name, address, DOB"? If so,

> what is the "more"?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Maybe Angelina did see them, however how many people and drivers didn't?  Just takes one to cause life changing for both.  Wouldn't it be more sensible if cyclists realised lights and reflective gear is not just to help them see but to potentially save their lives by making them visible to all. 
    • I agree with this, I'm afraid.  I see it every day within the industry - a lot of it is to do with the fact that the people working in it are younger now and don't realise how much they're being subconsciously indoctrinated by certain forces (social media and group-think), so they're now pathologically incapable of objectivity. Also, they don't read books, pick up the phone to experts, or generally know how to research properly.  On a lot of documentaries I've worked on, I've been leant on hard to peddle narratives that are not only heavily biased, but often outright inaccurate, and I've fought back where I can. It's really depressing,  I'd like to think that, at the BBC, I'd be immune from these influences, and allowed to project a 360 view, but it's sadly  not the case. You'd also be surprised at how toothless the BBC can be when presented with something that's irrefutable but could, say, upset Murdoch or the DM...  Hands up, I'm guilty of platforming extreme right-wingers, misogynists, anti-abortionists, racists, anarchists, pro gun lobbyists, rape-apologists... you name it, I'm all for putting them in a programme. Even though I deplore what they stand for, it's important to me to have a counter-view, and they almost always hang themselves.  (Job done.)  It's funny that certain people are up in arms about Rockets posting 'misinformation' in the Traffic threads, but  seem OK with it in broadcast, as long as it aligns with their views. You have to ask yourselves, what is it that you really want? If it's an echo chamber then just watch Fox News or CNN, however you lean. But then what's the point of it all? I fear the ship's sailed, so I don't know why I bother. 
    • That’s right, we could see them passing us at the stops and then as we overtook them. There was one moped without lights doing about 30mph.    Stupid is one word, but when it puts pedestrians at risk, it’s a different word. We’ll be raising it and hopefully get some publicity about road safety awareness 
    • Yes, your name and political views aren't mentioned there, you see. But what the title of the thread does refer to is a report in the Telegraph (and other right wing and, actually, left wing media) on an internal BBC memo that was considered by the BBC board on 17 October 2025 and which was so devastating the Director General himself considered he should resign.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...