Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
newscientist.com
Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
1–10 of 83 posts
Re: Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
#2so, i'm not generally one for low brow insults, alas, here we are; fucking ignorant cunts.
i'm in a position to have a pretty good grasp on (a) what deepmind are doing with this data, (b) who is working on this data (i.e the primary career researchers in this job have), and (c) the difficulty required to get any significant amount of patient data from any health organisation.
but yeah, let's just assume this anonymised data will get to google and they'll somehow figure out who is who, then use it to spam us with more ads.
pathetic.
Re: Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
#3so, i'm not generally one for low brow insults, alas, here we are; fucking ignorant cunts. i'm in a position to have a pretty good grasp on (a) what deepmind are doing with this data, (b) who is working on this data (i.e the primary career researchers in this job have), and (c) the difficulty required to get any significant amount of patient data from any health organisation. but yeah, let's just assume this anonymis…
not entirely clear what you're cross about here, but perhaps the original story (which I reported) might be useful - https://www.newscientist.com/article/2086454-revealed-google...
happy to address any criticisms
Re: Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
#4so, i'm not generally one for low brow insults, alas, here we are; fucking ignorant cunts. i'm in a position to have a pretty good grasp on (a) what deepmind are doing with this data, (b) who is working on this data (i.e the primary career researchers in this job have), and (c) the difficulty required to get any significant amount of patient data from any health organisation. but yeah, let's just assume this anonymis…
> will get to google
The data "got to" Google when it was sent to Google DeepMind.
> anonymised
I expect a HN to understand how this is usually impossible. Correlating data may seem hard to the layman, but Google is experience at data analysis.
Arguing that Google's AI division - who are trying to find subtle correlations in the medical data - somehow cannot correlate those same records back to their "personally identifiable information" laughable.
> use it to
That's not the only reason to not want your medical data spread around. A better reason might be not wanting your data in more places where it could be stolen or leaked.
edit:
> pathetic
The "pathetic" part is the complete disregard for the people that generated that data. It doesn't matter if Google is talented at what they do, or if the data might be used for something that you might think is useful. I may even agree about the utility of the data, but if you aren't getting explicit informed consent from the people involved, you have a serious ethics problem.
Re: Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
#5People in the UK who want to complain about this could try the ICO who strongly regulate health information.
They could also look at any advertising material and report that to ASA (if it meets the criteria for being regulated).
That trust has a Caldicott Guardian who will be responsible - legally - for keeping patient data safe. I would have liked a quote from them, although I guess that quote would be something like "No patient identifiable data has been shared with DeepMind". That would be scary, I have no doubt that DeepMind would do a very good job of de-anonymising data, but I know that Google would have to be monumentally stupid to try that.
There are other data projects happening in the NHS - care.data (that dot isn't a typo!) is one that got a lot of attention. That allowed (after some fuss) people to opt-out. (It didn't allow people to specifically opt in to show their support, which is something I would have done.)
I'm a bit wary of Vice's reporting here. They don't seem to know what they're talking about (there's nothing about controls over patient data in the NHS, for example); they don't seem to have approached the Trust involved; they haven't done a good job of explaining what's going on.
There are some really bad failures or data protection in the NHS (especially around mass email! People using CC instead of BCC to a group of people using an HIV clinic, for example) and there are some historic abuses (selling data to insurance companies) that led to changes in the law.
So I don't know if this is terrible and deserving of anger, or okay and poorly reported, or a good thing with misleading reporting.
Re: Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
#6so, i'm not generally one for low brow insults, alas, here we are; fucking ignorant cunts. i'm in a position to have a pretty good grasp on (a) what deepmind are doing with this data, (b) who is working on this data (i.e the primary career researchers in this job have), and (c) the difficulty required to get any significant amount of patient data from any health organisation. but yeah, let's just assume this anonymis…
not entirely clear what you're cross about here, but perhaps the original story (which I reported) might be useful - https://www.newscientist.com/article/2086454-revealed-google... happy to address any criticisms
Yours is a much better story. It'd be nice if mods could change the link from Vice to News Scientist.
Re: Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
#7Terrible reporting. Improving health outcomes by AI analysis of patient data is a much bigger prize - morally and commercially - than anything which could be achieved through ad targeting. Google is far too smart to squander such an opportunity by abusing patients' trust.
Re: Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
not entirely clear what you're cross about here, but perhaps the original story (which I reported) might be useful - https://www.newscientist.com/article/2086454-revealed-google... happy to address any criticisms
Yours is a much better story. It'd be nice if mods could change the link from Vice to News Scientist.
Agree. Mods can this happen?
Re: Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
#9[deleted]
Re: Google AI has access to huge haul of NHS patient data
#10Terrible reporting. Improving health outcomes by AI analysis of patient data is a much bigger prize - morally and commercially - than anything which could be achieved through ad targeting. Google is far too smart to squander such an opportunity by abusing patients' trust.
The big problem is the precedent it sets for data access.
What are the criteria for who gets access? What are the constraints of that access?
This story covers the latter being blown apart, the constraints were poorly defined and implemented and thus even if the criteria is well defined access to far more data was made possible.
I'm sure that few patients desire an end to research, or would argue that such access isn't a good thing... but what of the insurance industry? Should they have access? Would the NHS be able to define and enforce those constraints?
Perhaps that's an obvious no.
What then of an insurer partnering with a medical research company, from the viewpoint of "This costs insurance a lot of money, we'd like to fund a way to reduce that financial exposure".
The grey areas emerge immediately.
If we cannot control access to patient data, data that would be trivial to either strip anonymity or just to have in aggregate enough to still produce net-negatives (i.e. correlated by post code would reveal enough with little extra work)... and if we cannot define and enforce the constraints of access... then we really shouldn't be sharing what is highly sensitive and personal information that was originally only disclosed between a patient and a Doctor under the premise that what is shared is covered by the explicit and implicit confidentiality of that conversation.
It's always worth remembering:
Data was acquired under doctor patient confidentiality.
If we considered that data to have a licence, it is the most restrictive licence possible. One could consider what has happened here as a re-licensing without permission. Such an act could have a chilling effect on the relationship between the doctor and patient.