1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NHS data grab.

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by Footloose, May 13, 2021.

  1. Footloose

    Footloose Well-Known Member

    I'm guessing quite a number of people here are unaware that your patient data held in doctors' surgeries in England is to become part of a national database called the 'General Practice Data for Planning and Research data collection' from the 1st of July 2021 - unless people Opt-Out of this by downloading and printing out a PDF document, filling it in and then handing this to your GP before the 23rd of June. This will replace the 'General Practice Extraction Service' (GPES), which has been operating for over 10 years. This will also be the biggest data grab in the history of the NHS.

    https://www.theregister.com/2021/05/13/nhs_data_grab/

    The above link also points you to where you can download this PDF file, which I get the impression GPs will not have copies of this for you to fill in ... They have enough on their plate with Covid-19 to deal with, and no doubt the NHS Digital would prefer you NOT to opt-out ...

    Patients can also Opt-Out of NHS Digital sharing this data with 3rd parties, whilst the Body overseeing who and how this data will be used, has said it will be very careful about who can access this data, but how effective this will turn out to be, I will leave you to decide!
     
  2. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    Anyone who has had a PCR test has voluntarily given their DNA to the testing organisation. PCR* was designed to replicate DNA* for DNA profiling.

    PCR = P something or other Chain Reaction, look it up and you may realise why it makes a poor method of testing.
    DNA = Deoxyribonucleic Acid

    Viruses don't have DNA, only RNA
     
    Zou likes this.
  3. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

  4. John Farrell

    John Farrell Well-Known Member

    Some viruses do have dna. Adenoviruses, herpes viruses....etc
     
  5. WillieJ

    WillieJ Well-Known Member

    If it is capable of identifying a living individual then it is by definition personal data and you yourself state that it is so capable.
     
    Catriona likes this.
  6. gray1720

    gray1720 Well-Known Member

    (note: the below is rather more aggressive than I intended, but I've got a nasty headache, and I'm blowed if I'm going to invest time in re-writing it. Consider yourselves forewarned)

    I already have serious doubts as to your understanding of PCR, it's utility and otherwise, if you can't remember what the P stands for, given that it's the thing that makes it possible. And @John Farrell is entirely correct as to many viruses having DNA. It's just that the one in the news at the mo is an RNA virus. Perhaps you'd care to share your doubts over PCR, and we can see why you doubt it?
     
  7. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Well no. Not really. When I’ve worked with anonymised data and found something “wrong” or “unexpected” it has been a small pool and I’ve been able to ask folk to look at their own data to check it’s right. I don’t need to know who’s data it is to feed-back that something isn’t right and for that to be acted on. If statistical analysis picks up a small group at risk and this is new information then it should be able to be acted upon. We’ve seen this in the last months with a possible association between Covid vaccination and blood clots in a limited demographic. This enables the feedback to be given to the medical profession, if you have a patient with attributes a,b,c and co-morbidities i,ii, iii then test for x,y,z. These individuals can, in principle, be picked up at a local level by their GP practice without any personal information having been handled in the large. You do need an efficient mechanism to disseminate such information or it won’t get acted upon.
     
    Learning likes this.
  8. WillieJ

    WillieJ Well-Known Member

    The Data protection act does not say it has to be easy to identify a living individual nor does it say it has to be directly able to identify a living individual merely that it can be used to identify a living individual. I used to deal with DP issues from a contractual legal point of view and also I believe data protection is very important indeed so hopefully DerekW will not think this a case of point scoring or indeed of waving myself.:)

    Edit - I should add that I am out of date on DP issues. As I put in my retirement resignation in Feb 2015 I did not bother with the 2015 DP professional development stuff but my understanding is that it tightened requirements rather than loosened them.
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2021
  9. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    If a skilled I.T. person wants to get their hands on your personal data, they'll succeed. It only takes one idiot to open the wrong email, use a weak password or leave a session open.
     
  10. Derek W

    Derek W Well-Known Member

    If the shoe fits then slip it on and lace that bitch right up ;)
     

Share This Page