http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16021240

Big issue supported by a far too cosy with the private sector PM and brought up just before Xmas, but is there potential for the public at large?

Hm, another step towards privatisation.

One thing though, how many of these companies do animal testing, I'm sure there are plenty of people who wouldn't want their details used in conjunction with that.

Needs to be an opt in. If it should be allowed at all. Where does the money raised go? Windfall for us all or into gov. coffers to fund expenses.

Would this be shared with insurance companies, your workplace. Would it be anonomised? If there are breaches - which we know there will be - who would be accountable and liable for any damages?

It's supposed to be anonymised. Supposed to be...

It's currently an 'opt out' proposition. Not sure why you have to opt in to have your organs donated after your dead but they want it to be an opt out if you don't want to have details of your organs passed onto private companies while you're alive.

As a medic, this will only benefit the private companies. I want my details out of this.

Surely, under EU Data Protection law, the NHS has to obtain written permission from each person, before they are allowed to share the data?

If it's like the NHS Spine thing, each patient will be mailshot via their GP.

Absolutely. Everyone hates people that work in the public sector anyway, so at least there'll be less of them.
It's a Tory government - they'll be trying to privatise everything the government does, so they can make cash off the rest of us.
</2 glasses of wine induced mild political rant>

Eh?

Sorry, rant's over. Just a bit sore over some people's reaction to the strikes on Wednesday.
As you all were, nothing to see here.

For pretty much anything to get beyond the laboratory stage and into clinical trials in people there will be animal testing involved at some stage. It's a legal requirement under UK, EU law and pretty much every other jurisdiction in the world to get a licence.

Well yes.

Considering the ways in which drugs firms generally develop new drugs I'm finding it difficult to understand of what use anonymous data will be to them.

I could understand them making more of the line concerning making clinical trials easier but as for drug development, well, that data is pretty much useless isn't it?

It is of more use if that data is then passed on to other companies to create profiles regarding insurance more than anything.

Sounds to me like a massive and generally accurate market research grab so that they can look at demand and tailor development towards more profitable areas.

I don't have that level of knowledge, but I can see value in having data attached to a real person, and not anonymised. I'm pretty sure drug companies would love to encourage me to use their latest miracle asthma cure, as nobbling my GP to push it probably isn't allowed.



Well, yes. That's a given. We'll all have to have mandatory genetic profiling next.

I don't know why Cameron is giving us all this BS about it being a good thing. Why can't he just be honest about it, and say it's just another way to make sure he gets a decent directorship when he leaves office, and also a way to ensure the drug companies keep making more money.