DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

UK: How anonymous is NHS patient data? Dept. of Health granted 132 requests for identifiable patient data without patient consent

Posted on December 12, 2011 by Dissent

Sade Laja reports:

A claim by the Department of Health that patient data shared with private firms for medical research would be anonymised has been challenged by privacy campaigners.

The prime minister said last week that plans to share records and other NHS data would make it easier to develop and test new drugs and treatments. The DH says all necessary safeguards would be in place to ensure protection of patients’ details.

But Ethics and Genetics, a social and technology campaign group, says freedom of information requests show that under certain circumstances data anonymity would not always be guaranteed.

Data accessed under the secondary uses service, which is jointly delivered by the NHS Information Centre and Connecting for Health (CfH), for the NHS and its partners, is not always anonymised.

The CfH states on its website that the service only provides access to “anonymous patient-based data” for purposes other than direct clinical care, such as healthcare planning, commissioning services, public health and national policy development. However, this is at odds with the health department’s FoI disclosure.

When asked whether the data accessed under the service was always anonymised, the DH said it was “not always accessed in an anonymised format.” Access to identifiable information is, however, limited to those circumstances where legal permission has been granted by the secretary of state for health under the 2002 NHS control of patient information regulations.

Read more on The Guardian.

When an issue is so important, it is disturbing that public-facing statements and assurances are refuted by information that was only obtained under freedom of information. In response to another request under FOI, the Dept. of Health reported that on 132 occasions since 2008, it had granted access to identifiable patient information without patient consent. The Department had also granted access to pseudoanonymized data. The number of times that occurred was not indicated.

Should U.K. citizens be concerned? Any time patients do not know where their identifiable or “pseudoanonymous” health information has gone should be cause for some level of concern and scrutiny. That’s not to say that the same isn’t true here, but I don’t think Americans have any sense of how often this type of thing happens here.

No related posts.

Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← Coalition of Law Enforcement and Retail (C.L.E.A.R.) hacked; membership database dumped
CEO Strategist hacked and 6000 Accounts dumped →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • A year after cyber attack, Columbus could invest $23M in cybersecurity upgrades
  • Gravity Forms Breach Hits 1M WordPress Sites
  • Stormous claims to have protected health info on 600,000 patients of North Country Healthcare. The data appear fake. (1)
  • Back from the Brink: District Court Clears Air Regarding Individualized Damages Assessment in Data Breach Cases
  • Multiple lawsuits filed against Doyon Ltd over April 2024 data breach and late notification
  • Chinese hackers suspected in breach of powerful DC law firm
  • Qilin Emerged as The Most Active Group, Exploiting Unpatched Fortinet Vulnerabilities
  • CISA tags Citrix Bleed 2 as exploited, gives agencies a day to patch
  • McDonald’s McHire leak involving ‘123456’ admin password exposes 64 million applicant chat records
  • Qilin claims attack on Accu Reference Medical Laboratory. It wasn’t the lab’s first data breach.

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Here’s What a Reproductive Police State Looks Like
  • Meta investors, Zuckerberg to square off at $8 billion trial over alleged privacy violations
  • Australian law is now clearer about clinicians’ discretion to tell our patients’ relatives about their genetic risk
  • The ICO’s AI and biometrics strategy
  • Trump Border Czar Boasts ICE Can ‘Briefly Detain’ People Based On ‘Physical Appearance’
  • DeleteMyInfo Wins 2025 Digital Privacy Excellence Award from Internet Safety Council
  • TikTok Loses First Appeal Against £12.7M ICO Fine, Faces Second Investigation by DPC

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.