> The government can do whatever the hell they like with my data - on the condition that anyone else can too.
Wonderful.
Now consider how a potential employer might use your data:
Have you ever seen a GP for stress or mental health issues? Oh, maybe we are dis-inclined to hire you.
Suffer from back pain? Well that's one of the most given reasons for needing time off from work, which means you are a liability and we won't hire you.
Or even a business looking for partners:
Of these two evenly matched companies, this one over here has a CEO that has seen his Dr for stress and has had heart attacks in the past... he can't take the pressure and will be taking it easy when we need aggressive, let's go with the other one.
That's before you even touch what insurance companies will do, or whether schools will look into the mental health of little Timothy's family before determining whether to let the child into the school, or what retirement facilities might be available to you at what cost when you're 75+.
Once out in the open, this data is free for everyone to use. And it's going to be hard to then restrict how it is used by trying to bolt one gate after another.
Although I didn't say it explicitly in the particular sentence you quoted, I did say (pseudo|a)nonymously just after. I'm not suggesting identifiable health records should be searchable by all!
You raise interesting points. I think you are quite correct in saying these things are likely to happen. But I wonder whether hiding such information is actually the most efficient strategy. I mean if some divine power gave us all the ability to see inside each others minds, and ergo all the bullshit, lies, and politicking that makes up a great deal of human interaction was to evaporate, wouldn't the world be a better, more forgiving place? Obviously this is all a bit esoteric, and the game-theoretical analysis of moving from the status quo to a world of almost creepy honesty would almost certainly show that it could never happen, but I find it a useful thought nonetheless.
I said before that I do want the problems with using real names to be fixed. And I am thinking that insurance for periodic doctor visits is probably flawed.
Wonderful.
Now consider how a potential employer might use your data:
Have you ever seen a GP for stress or mental health issues? Oh, maybe we are dis-inclined to hire you.
Suffer from back pain? Well that's one of the most given reasons for needing time off from work, which means you are a liability and we won't hire you.
Or even a business looking for partners:
Of these two evenly matched companies, this one over here has a CEO that has seen his Dr for stress and has had heart attacks in the past... he can't take the pressure and will be taking it easy when we need aggressive, let's go with the other one.
That's before you even touch what insurance companies will do, or whether schools will look into the mental health of little Timothy's family before determining whether to let the child into the school, or what retirement facilities might be available to you at what cost when you're 75+.
Once out in the open, this data is free for everyone to use. And it's going to be hard to then restrict how it is used by trying to bolt one gate after another.