The Great Health and Social Care Reset for the Big Data Economy Part 1.1
A Timeline of NHS Capture: 1970s-2013
Table of Contents
Introduction
The first steps towards NHS privatisation
Britain’s Biggest Enterprise: ideas for the radical reform of the NHS - an NHS privatisation blueprint
The incremental privatisation of the 80s, 90s and 2000s
Innovation Health and Wealth: Accelerating Adoption and Diffusion in the NHS report released December 2011
Nesta and the People Powered Health Programme
Nesta, the Behavioural Insights Team and Bloomberg Philanthropies
Health and Social Care Act 2012
Davos 2012: the World Economic Forum launches their Sustainable Health Systems project
The WEF’s Sustainable Health Systems London workshop in August 2012
The Global Health Policy Summit in August 2012 and the Institute for Global Health Innovation reports
The Inaugural World Innovation Summit for Health and Big Data and Health working group report in 2013
Note to the reader
For a table of contents with jump links to each section, please click on the grey parallel dashes bar on left side hand of screen to access pop up menu with clickable subheadings.
Substack does not appear to offer the functionality of clickable links to and from references. If you wish to be able to click through to references (and back) from the main text whilst reading, you can do so on Real Left’s website version here.
I have included archived links for references where it was possible to do so. If you wish to access any of the reports/multi-page documents referenced, should they become unavailable from download links included, please email: llsinbox@posteo.net and I can send you a downloaded copy.
Introduction
The first article in this series, ‘The Health and Social Care Reset for the Big Data Economy’, explores the top down orchestrated transformation of health and social care in the UK in line with the economic and societal restructuring catalyzed by the fourth industrial revolution.
My interest in this subject was ignited on encountering information from alt-media journalist Zed Pheonix — an alias of former actor and ‘Cash For Questions’ sting op agent Ben Fellows — who claimed to have been contacted by the former head of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation with whistleblowing allegations.[1] The essence of these alleged disclosures was that the National Health Service is being radically remodelled to serve as an ‘anchor institution’ for a high-tech surveillance and big data run technocratic and totalitarian state, which is being ideologically and structurally organised around ‘health and wellness’; and that it is planned that this ‘Big Health Brother’ society be exported worldwide.
I was able to verify a number of the specific claims Fellows reported through investigation of publicly available documents, which are referenced extensively in these articles. The research process also led to my unearthing further details of this radical reset; the emergent picture corresponding with the findings of a number of other citizen researchers of the fourth industrial revolution.
The invaluable work of Alison McDowell [2] was particularly helpful as a guidelight for parsing information. Specifically, the incorporation of one of her key findings that an ‘impact investment ecosystem’ is being constructed by the ruling class, in order to replace the labourer-consumer model of profit extraction of the third industrial revolution with one centered on the surveillance, data harvesting, commodification, and algorithmically organised trading of digital replicas of (all) life-forms. [3]
Whilst post 2020-2022 lockdowns — having experienced a preview of living under a form of biosecurity fascism — more people are now awake to this as an ongoing threat to the masses, a more granular analysis of how and why such a system is being implemented remains somewhat peripheral in the independent media and truther/freedom community (let alone the infosphere of the largely oblivious wider public). This series is my contribution to help ‘fill in’ some gaps therefore.
Parts 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 present a historical a timeline of the disassemblement of the NHS from the legacy system of free-for-all at the point of service public healthcare, centred in ‘expensive institutions’ [4] carried out by ‘trained professionals’, [5] to the increasingly privatised, rationed,[6] de-professionalised, home and community based and SMART technology mediated self-management, preventative, and ‘precision’ healthcare model being rolled out today.
Many aspects of the period of dismantling up until the COVID-19 era have been well documented by other privatisation critics; Dr Bob Gill’s documentary The Great NHS Heist [7] and Stewart Player and Colin Leys’ The Plot Against the NHS [8] are two recommended sources of such investigative journalism. According to Leys, whose work on NHS capture from 2000-2011 recognises the undue influence of the World Economic Forum on NHS policy setting [9]
Changes were made covertly, using government powers that did not require primary legislation. The true purpose of a series of so-called reforms was deliberately concealed. It is because of this that what has happened deserves to be called a plot. [10]
However, the reading adopted by all anti-privatisation organisations, political groups, journalists, authors and campaigners that I have come across — of COVID-19 as a medical emergency badly mismanaged by the government and health and care services, albeit one favourably exploited by vested interests — misses the mark.
In contrast, the evidence I present in Part 1.3 reveals that the COVID-19 event was a golden opportunity and watershed enabler for the preplanned and already partially implemented restructuring of health and social care for the emerging big data economy. The (semi) closed doors of the national health service for an extended period, and other attendant conditions of the (purported) public health crisis, facilitated the actualisation of many aspects of a premeditated health care transformation, set out in public healthcare plans from at least 2011.
The articles comprising part two broaden the framework of analysis by further contextualising this transformation alongside evidence of the coterminous rollout of Self Monitoring And Reporting Technologies (SMART) infrastructure, and the Internet of Everything to facilitate the ubiquitous surveillance and data gathering required of the healthcare 4.0 and industry 4.0 model. [11]
They also delve deeper into impact investing in the healthcare sphere and other topics key to the health and social care reset including
NHS Impact Investing Foundation Guy and St Thomas’s role in lobbying for the adoption of plant-based diets and for a National Food Strategy that promotes the end of UK agriculture;
The military origins, key figures and break-through discoveries of the NBIC (nanotech, bio-tech, info-tech and cogno-tech) revolution, also known as biodigital convergence or transhumanism, and its consequences for healthcare and society;
The Big Tech takeover of healthcare systems and services;
The rollout of deep tech including AI, robotics, digital twins and the metaverse through health and social care, and;
Behavioural change interventions and the building of a ‘quantified-self’ or health-culture to facilitate social control and promote the new human augmentation/transhumanist/eugenicist paradigm.
A quick caveat feels necessary to conclude this introduction. The articles comprising part one of this series provide a selective and abridged history of the many waves of activity driving the transformation of the health and social care sectors. Unavoidably, key events and actors are omitted, which proved beyond the scope of three articles of under an hour each. The extensive references listed at the end of every piece offer ample further reading for interested individuals, however.
The first steps towards NHS privatisation
The stages of growth and transformation from the inception of the UK’s National Health Service — the oldest and largest provider of health services in the world [12] — to its current state today have mirrored the wider economic shifts from social democratic, to neoliberal, to the incoming stakeholder [13] phases of modern capitalism: with each internal step establishing the infrastructure required for the proceeding phase. To illustrate, the enshrinement of the allopathic medical model through its dissemination via a national healthcare institution supported profitable markets for pharmaceutical companies through mass drug treatments and vaccination, the medicalisation of birth and so on. Paper birth to death records of the medical care of (virtually) all UK citizens have created a valuable resource ripe for exploitation in the digital age.
As ‘Keep Our NHS Public’ have noted, ‘Moving from a labour-intensive NHS to digital care inevitably means more private sector involvement, as the digital infrastructure is capital-intensive and privately provided.’ [14] It is worth beginning therefore with a brief historical overview of the process of the progressive privatisation of the NHS.
In 1974 Sir Keith Joseph and Margaret Thatcher founded the think-tank Centre for Policy Studies, which developed the bulk of the policy agenda that became known as Thatcherism, or in the Centre’s own words ‘the privatisation revolution’. [15]
The Economic Reconstruction Group was another institution directed by Thatcher under a similar remit, [16] established whilst she was still leader of the opposition party. In his 1977 report to the Conservative Party’s ERG, The Ridley Plan Nicholas Ridley wrote the following:
Denationalisation should not be attempted by frontal attack, but by a policy of preparation for preparation for return to the private sector by stealth. We should first pass legislation to destroy the public sector monopolies. We might also need to take power to sell assets. Secondly, we should fragment the industries as far as possible; and set up the units as separate profit centres. . .There are a number of industries which should be broken up into separate companies, as many of which as possible should be sold to private buyers. [17]
Britain’s Biggest Enterprise: ideas for the radical reform of the NHS - an NHS privatisation blueprint
Over a decade later, the Centre for Policy Studies commissioned the key report Britain’s Biggest Enterprise: ideas for the radical reform of the NHS [18] from Oliver Letwin and John Redwood, who were employees of the NM Rothschild and Sons privatisation unit. [19]
The role of this privatisation unit in the transfer of British utilities into private hands is a matter of public record. [20]
The pamphlet sets out 5 pillars of reform:
The establishment of the NHS as an independent Trust;
Increased use of joint venture between the NHS and private sector;
Extending the principle of charging;
Introducing a system of ‘health credits’: i.e. GP issued ‘credit notes’ entitling the patient to treatment for a specific complaint, which can be supplemented by the patient to buy private alternatives, and finally;
Bringing in a national health insurance scheme.
Like Ridley, the authors recommend an incremental execution of these goals:
One could begin, for example, with the establishment of the NHS as an independent trust, with increased joint ventures between the NHS and the private sector; move on next to the use of ‘credits’ to meet standard charges set by a central NHS funding administration for independently managed hospitals or districts; and only at the last stage create a national health insurance scheme separate from the tax payer system. [21]
Arguably, the introduction of Personal Health Budgets in 2014 — subsequently expanded [22] — are analogous to the concept of health credits.
What’s more, an attempt was made to introduce a specific national health insurance tax through the additional 1.25% health and social care levy [23] passed in The Health and Social Care Levy Act in September 2021. However, this levy along with the increase in national insurance contributions, which was implemented the previous year, was reversed by chancellor of the exchequer Kwasi Kwarteng under the Truss Ministry. [24]
All Letwin and Redwood’s proposed reforms then, either already have been implemented or had been attempted, by the date of writing.
The incremental privatisation of the 80s, 90s and 2000s
Compulsory competitive tendering for the provision of domestic, catering and laundry services was brought in under the Thatcher government, in 1983. [25] In the same year access to NHS opticians and dental care was reduced, and charges were brought in for these services.
In 1990 John Major’s Conservative government passed the NHS and Community Care Act [26] which introduced an internal market to the NHS by splitting the NHS into ‘service purchasers’ and ‘service providers’. This meant hospitals and GPs had to compete for custom, and the successful parties would be rewarded with greater funding, [27] which added a corporate management structure and the principle of competition into the NHS.
A year later the Conservatives introduced Private Finance Initiatives (PFIs): a form of Public Private Partnership, which finances public sector projects by borrowing capital from private sector investors. The upfront capital, plus additional interest payments, is repaid by the government over a given time period; typically twenty to thirty years.
Under New Labour’s NHS reforms from 1997, over 100 new hospitals were funded through PFIs. Such moves were heavily criticized [28] for draining money from the NHS, as hospitals thusly funded were far more expensive long-term for the tax payer and meant the asset was usually still not owned by the NHS after debt was paid off. In 2009 Gordon Brown’s government brought in the Unsustainable Provider Regime, which allowed the closure and selling off of publicly-owned NHS land and property to pay off debts to private financiers. Offshore funds had bought up about half of the equity in PFI and PF2 projects by 2019. [29]
Blair’s 2000 The NHS Plan: A Plan for Investment. A Plan for Reform [30] marked the introduction of private provision of medical services into the NHS for the first time.
Routine planned surgery, diagnostic tests and procedures were contracted out to private sector treatment centres at greater cost than the same care would have been in the NHS.
The Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003 [31] provided the legislative foundation for the creation of Foundation Trusts, which removed government control of NHS trusts by turning them into competing independent corporations.
Screenshot of the Health and Social Care (Community Heath and Standards) Act 2003.
Their sole statutory general duty would now be to operate ‘effectively, efficiently, and economically.’ [32] The profit opportunity combined with lack of adequate safeguards to ensure continuity of one of the NHS’s founding principles of ‘equal care for equal need’, meant the Foundation Trust structure incentivised selection of patients, treatments, and services on the basis of financial risk rather than healthcare needs. [33]
It also enabled the private sector to further penetrate Primary Care through permitting the introduction of what became known as Alternative Provider Medical Services (APMS) contracts. [34]
In 2003, testbed sites for Accountable Care Organisations (ACOs) called the Kaiser Permanente Beacon sites were launched in Torbay, Birmingham and Northumberland. [35] [36]
ACOs are a group of healthcare providers who coordinate care and control an allotted budget for a population of patients and are able to profit from the savings; a shift away from fee-for-service payments model. [37]
The system originated with the Kaiser Permanente directed U.S Medicare system. Both Kaiser and US health insurance giant UnitedHealthcare were brought them in to teach the NHS how to operate under the American model. [38] As part of this process the NHS entered into a contract with UnitedHealthcare to pilot their EverCare system: a systems redesign service. [39] It is relevant to mention that Kaiser Permanente is a multi-million dollar impact investor in areas of health determinants, community social services, and inclusive small-business financing, [40] with a particular focus on affordable housing through their Thriving Communities Fund. [41] (Impact investing as the cornerstone of the big data economy will be explored in more detail in Part 1.2.)
The Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003 was steered through Parliament by Secretary of State for Health Alan Milburn and his adviser Simon Stevens [42] — who previously acted as adviser for Tony Blair and went on to head UnitedHealth the following year. [43]
As detailed below, and in Articles 1.2 and 1.3, Stevens maintained a close working relationship with the World Economic Forum, established during his presidency of UnitedHealth from 2004 to 2014, throughout his tenure as chief executive of the NHS from 2014-2021. As well as acting as Project Steward for the WEF’s 2012 launched ‘Sustainable Health Systems’ initiative, [44] he served on the Executive Board of the WEF’s ‘Value in Healthcare Coalition’; [45] announced the NHS Testbed and Trials programme at Davos 2016; [46] and oversaw the NHS confederation-led and Novartis sponsored NHS ‘reset’ in 2020.
Stevens, who Health Service Journal editor Alastair McLellan rated in 2016 as the ‘most powerful person in the country’ after the prime minister, the chancellor and Bank of England governor, [47] was knighted for his ‘services to health care’ [48] at the end of 2019. Other figures instrumental to the NHS’s fourth industrial revolution aligned remodel have been similarly bestowed with Royal Honours.
Innovation Health and Wealth: Accelerating Adoption and Diffusion in the NHS report released December 2011
The December 2011 Innovation, Health and Wealth: Accelerating Adoption & Diffusion in the NHS report [49] was overseen by then NHS Chief Executive Sir David Nicholson, in response to the mandate set out earlier that year in the government’s The Plan For Growth for the acceleration of adoption and diffusion of innovations across the NHS. [50] Both documents formed part of a wider ‘UK strategy for Health Innovation and Life Sciences.’ [51]
Innovation, Health and Wealth: Accelerating Adoption and Diffusion in the NHS which was formulated in consultation with 160 organisations and 320 individual stakeholders from industry, academia, and clinical practice inside and outside of the NHS, [52] mentions the incoming legal duty for the NHS Commissioning Board and Clinical Commissioning groups to promote innovations. [53]
At the 2009 launch of ‘Innovation for a Healthier Future’: ‘a package of measures to encourage and spread innovation in the NHS’ including a £220 million fund, [54] ‘Birmingham’s Own Health’ telehealth system, and the ‘Telemedicine in Prison Health’ project being trialled at the time in Yorkshire and Humberside, were highlighted as positive examples of innovation. [55]
Two notable commitments in Health, Wealth and Innovation: Accelerating Adoption and Diffusion in the NHS are the pledge to ‘spread the use of telehealth and telecare across the country’, 52 and to transition to ‘digital by default,’ to cut costs. The report states
. . .every 1% reduction in face-to-face interactions saves up to £200 million. . .We will require the NHS to work towards reducing inappropriate face-to-face contacts and to switch to higher quality, more convenient, lower cost alternatives. [56]
The concept of ‘reverse innovation’, which reappears in a later NHS document as ‘frugal innovation’ [57] is endorsed; reverse innovation being defined as, ‘decommissioning a service or activity that is shown to have no added value or that has been replaced by something new or better.’ [58]
The potential financial opportunities for private corporations from healthcare innovations is made explicit where the authors state, ‘The international healthcare market is worth more than $4 trillion a year and the NHS must do more to exploit the commercial value of its knowledge, information, ideas and people.’ [59] To this end they envisage, ‘the establishment of a proactive, entrepreneurial NHS Global’, requiring ‘an entirely new relationship with industry based on partnership, not just transactions’. [60]
In the same vein, the report promises greater availability of joined up data sets ‘to support innovations across the healthcare service to improve services and outcomes’:
The Health and Social Care Information Centre will set up a secure data linkage service by Sept 2012, which will provide data extracts using linked data from primary and secondary care and other sources on a routine basis at an unidentifiable, individual level.
In addition, ‘a Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), will be established within the Medicines and Health Care Products Regulatory Agency’, to ‘service the specialised needs of the research and life sciences communities. [61]
Nesta and the People Powered Health Programme
One of the members of the Innovation, Health and Wealth: Accelerating Adoption and Diffusion in the NHS report’s external advisory group was the (then) chief executive of Nesta, the UK’s ‘Innovation Agency for Social Good’ (formerly the ‘National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts’). [62]
Former head of Nesta, Geoff Mulgan’s highly influential career has included roles as a government advisor including head of policy for Tony Blair; [63] writing or co-writing more than 15 books [64] and founding at least 14 organisations. [65] He is currently Professor of Collective Intelligence, Public Policy and Social Innovation at University College London, and was a participant in both the Institute for Global Health Innovations and the WEF Sustainable Health Systems projects discussed below, as well as a World Economic Forum Schwab Fellow from 2019-2022. [66]
In 2020 Mulgan was awarded a Knighthood in the Queen’s Birthday Honours, in recognition of his work to advance social innovation. [67]
His recent report Generative Shared Intelligence (GSI) and the Future Shape of Government [68] synthesises ‘several decades of work and reflection on government, including working with over 50 national governments around the world. . .the European Commission and United Nations’ [69] on, ‘the design of new institutions for global governance.’ [70]
In it, he argues that in the ‘new normal’ of the ‘polycrisis’ [71] era, governing with generative shared intelligence (GSI) should be the ‘defining goal for all governments’. [72] According to Mulgan, the intelligence (information) with which governments must orchestrate ‘all their activities’ for ‘whole of government actions and missions’ such as ‘net zero, pandemics or prosperity’ [73] includes, ‘data, evidence, models, tacit knowledge, foresight, and creativity and innovation’, and the key to unlocking this next-generation mode of governance lies in the ‘open data movement’. [74]
One of the pillars of GSI recommended for adoption in the report is ‘modernised public finance linked to impact’ [75] (i.e. social impact finance). Mulgan claims on his website to have coined the term ‘social impact bond’, and to have drafted for Tony Blair the commission of a review on social finance chaired by Ronald Cohen, ‘partly inspired by a session with the major foundations and investors in the US in 1997’. [76] He helped set up Big Society Capital — a government provider of social finance. [76]
Since its inception in 1998 [77] Nesta has played a pivotal role in the UK’s ongoing transition to a big data economy, including foundation laying work in the ‘impact investment movement’. [78]
Their ‘What is impact investment?’ video proclaims
At Nesta, we believe impact investments have the potential to transform business and society. Through our own investment arm, we have backed enterprises with a proven record of positive social impact across areas including the arts, health and education. [79]
Beyond the UK, they been active internationally in ‘mobilising data and knowledge to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals’, through developing the methods and training for initiatives like the UN’s ‘new accelerator labs’. [80]
Nesta also bought the Cabinet Office established Behavioural Insights Team from the government in successive stages in 2014, [81] then 2021. [82]
The Innovation, Health and Wealth: Accelerating Adoption & Diffusion in the NHS report mentions increasing the profile of, and continuing to invest in, ‘NHS Innovation Challenge prizes’, [83] to incentivise and support innovation for predetermined ‘problems in need of high tech solutions’: [84] a parallel scheme to the ‘Challenge prizes’ Nesta promotes for their ‘generating ideas’ stage of innovation methods.
The NHS has continued to follow Nesta’s ‘Seven stages of innovation’ template in its launch of the 2015 NHS ‘Innovation Accelerator’: a programme to support exceptional individuals scaling of promising innovations across England’s NHS; the 2016 NHS Testbeds and Trials; the 2020-2023 NHS Innovation lab [85] (‘stage 5 — public and social labs’); the adoption of social impact bond financing structures from 2014 (See part 1.2); and anticipatory regulation, [86] in the form of previously mentioned testbeds and sandboxes. Nesta categorises such testbeds as part of anticipatory regulatory as they allow the regulator to not only play ‘a more active role in supporting innovation but also in building an information and evidence base via direct research activities.’ [87]
In 2011 Nesta’s Innovation Lab launched the ‘People Powered Health’ programme. This worked with ‘teams of doctors, hospitals, community organisations and patients in six locations to design and implement new approaches that actively engaged patients, communities and social networks in managing conditions like diabetes’, using peer support, social prescribing, and other preventative interventions. [88]
After the close of the programme, Nesta worked with policy makers, national health organisations and patient groups to scale the ideas, which they claimed could deliver £4.4 billion in savings nationally. [89]
Nesta, the Behavioural Insights Team and Bloomberg Philanthropies
The Innovation lab was part of a Nesta partnership with Bloomberg Philanthrophies involving 20 innovation teams. Innovation teams or ‘i-teams’ were units and funds established by governments to create ‘a new kind of experimental government’ through open innovation, cross- sector collaboration, and mobilising data and insights in new ways. [90]
The Behavioural Insights Team, which has a specific health and well-being focused team, is another of those featured in the report. Their featured projects involved applying nudge techniques across low-cost randomised controlled trials to achieve goals like reducing tax debt, increasing organ donation rates, and decreasing the number of jobseekers allowance claimants, [91] often utilising pre-existing administrative data to reduce the cost of data collection. Healthcare specific projects included sending letters to GPs from England’s Chief Medical Officer, which used techniques like ‘social norm’ messaging to attempt to reduce antibiotic prescriptions. [92]
Multi-billionaire and ex-mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg, has been highly influential in the spread of data-driven governance through a number of initiatives [93] including What Works Cities: a smart city certification scheme, [94] and the Partnership for Healthy Cities, founded in 2017 in collaboration with the World Health Organisation, and for which New York served as a test bed for during his mayorship. In its policy recommendations, the Partnership for Healthy Cities lists ‘a citywide surveillance program focused on NCDs [Non Communicable Diseases] and their risk factors’. [95]
Bloomberg also provided the loan to Goldman Sachs to enable the first SIB in the US in 2012, which aimed to reduce reoffending among adolescents aged 16-18 detained at Rikers Island. [96]
The Health and Social Care Act 2012
Oliver Letwin is another figure, like Stevens, who appears repeatedly as a pilot of the NHS metamorphosis. He attracted some controversy for his role in formulating the Health and Social Care Act 2012— officially proposed by Andrew Lansley, David Cameron’s Health Secretary — whilst serving as Minister of State for Government Policy. Letwin attempted to distance himself from the views he had advocated for in Britain’s Biggest Enterprise: ideas for the radical reform of the NHS after The Mirror (in 2016) reported that the 2012 Act ‘passed into law’ several of these reforms. [97]
Whilst head of government policy Letwin also oversaw the launch of the government ‘nudge unit’ and its 2010 report Applying behavioural insight to health. [98] One case study highlighted in the report is a pilot of Transport for London and Intelligent Health’s ‘Step2Get’ initiative at two London secondary schools. This entailed pupils being given a card to swipe machines placed on lamp-posts along a route to school, which allowed them to redeem rewards such as vouchers and cinema tickets for miles walked. [99]
Returning to the subject of the Health and Social Care Act 2012, NHS anti-privatisation lobbying groups including Public Matters have ascribed co-authorship of it to Kaiser Permanente. [100] Over 200 of the parliamentarians who voted through the 2012 Health and Social Care Act in April of that year had financial links to private healthcare. [101] Donors included private health insurers, and astroturf (i.e. pseudo-grassroots) groups in support, ‘Doctors for reform’ and ‘Nurses For reform’, appeared around the time of the Bill’s passage through parliament. [102]
The establishment of the NHS as an ‘independent trust’, which became NHS England, and the increased use of private providers were central reforms of the Health and Social Care Act 2012. [103] Significantly, the Act abolished the government’s legal duty to provide ‘secondary and other NHS services to meet all reasonable requirements throughout England’; handing responsibility to Public Health England (along with local authorities and other quangos) for the newly watered-down duties of public health provision. [104]
It also established 207 Clinical Commissioning Groups, (CCGs) (the precursor to the Integrated Care Units introduced in the Health and Social Care Act 2022) in place of Primary Care Trusts and Strategic Health Authorities. CCGs were entities modelled on private sector arrangements in U.S healthcare which assumed control over spending on services and, critics argued, were intended to reduce the number of expensive hospital referrals. [105]
In addition, the Act introduced compulsory commercial tendering of all contracts worth over £165K, with a few limited exceptions, resulting in one one-third of NHS contracts being awarded to the private sector in the first year after the Act’s implementation. [106] It also allowed Foundation Trusts to obtain 49% of their income from private patients and other non-NHS sources, up from 2%, which resulted in further restrictions on availability of care and beds, and a diversion of NHS staff and resources to private patients. 100
Part 9 of the Act [107] legislated for legislated for various powers and duties relating to the establishment of the body, ‘The Health and Social Care Information Centre’, as envisaged in Innovation, Health and Wealth: Accelerating Adoption and Diffusion in the NHS the previous year, with a remit to ‘collect confidential information under a variety of circumstances’. [108]
MedConfidential was founded in early 2013, in response to these changes, which their websites states, ‘appeared to set up a massive GP data grab.’ Two ‘massive’ GP data mining programmes have since been attempted unsuccessfully: care.data in 2014 and GP data (‘GPDPR’) in 2021. [109]
MedConfidential’s website lists a number of ensuing major data breaches and scandals that have occurred since, [110] including the 1.6 million identifiable patient records that The Royal Free NHS trust unlawfully gave to Google’s AI firm DeepMind. [111]
In the same month as the Act passed, the Clinical Practice Research Datalink — a consolidation and expansion of the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) established in 1994 — was launched. [112] The CPRD was supposed to provide researchers with access to safeguarded data that respected patient confidentiality, however it was exposed in 2014 as having extracted highly sensitive ‘free text’ (i.e.: GP’s own notes containing potentially sensitive information) from patients’ GP records without approval or fair processing. [113]
Davos 2012: the World Economic Forum launches their Sustainable Health Systems Project
The Scenarios for Sustainable Health Systems project was initiated at the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting in Davos in January 2012, [114] at which key figures from big pharma, academia, national and global governance — including Directors of Health at the World Bank, the WHO, and the European Commission and senior management from the NHS — met [9] to discuss the findings of the preceding WEF report The Financial Sustainability of Health Systems. A Case for Change. [115]
Simon Stevens, who was at the time head of UnitedHealth’s Global Division, acted as Project Steward of the Steering Board for this first World Economic Forum report. [116] The principal attributed authors were all (then) senior management at McKinsey and Company, [117] who were also credited as project partners of both reports (discussed below).
In The Financial Sustainability of Health Systems report the need for radical transformation of healthcare systems is situated within the wider economic context of ‘unprecedented fiscal pressures’ and ‘severe austerity programmes’. [118]
Of the four proposed responses by governments, namely — rationing access to care; shifting the burden of healthcare costs to individuals or employers by withdrawing government coverage and mandating private coverage; increasing financing to health through raising taxes, raising the retirement age or reallocating funds from other public services; and ‘radically raising the productivity of health systems to deliver more services with fewer resources’ — the final option is deemed the most ‘immediately attractive’. [119]
The report recommends reinventing delivery systems for productivity improvements through ‘new models of care’ [120] using, ‘capital-light settings, leveraged talent models and low-cost channels, such as home-based, patient-driven models’, alongside ‘capacity reductions in higher-cost channels’. Further, it states
Incentives and regulations can encourage technology innovation that optimises for both quality and cost, either by providing lower cost therapies, by using the digital revolution to boost the productivity of clinicians, or by eliminating the need for other interventions. [121]
The WEF’s ‘Sustainable Health Systems’ London workshop in August 2012
In the second phase of the project, which took place throughout 2012, eight workshops were held at locations across the world to rethink the structure and organisation of health systems, with the goal of presenting the findings at the Annual Meeting 2013 to ‘drive further action.’ [122]
The London workshop involved many of the same key players from big pharma, academia, national and global governance and NHS senior management, including senior figures at NICE and the Wellcome Foundation. [123]
Similarly to the Davos gathering, the event billed itself as providing a platform for ‘policy-makers in government ministries, medical professionals, academics, and representatives of industry, civil society, and private and public healthcare providers’, to plan the transformation of health systems into future ready ‘financially sustainable’ models. [124]
The conclusions from all workshops were written up in the report Sustainable Health Systems: Visions, Strategies, Critical Uncertainties and Scenarios. 104
The Sustainable Health System delegates’ ‘Vision of England’s Health System in 2040’ is summarised as follows:
The primary locus of care will be the home, powered by technology and remote diagnosis, treatment and monitoring. . .Our citizens will be empowered and informed to cultivate a focus on wellness and prevention: They will be responsible to themselves and their communities for their health decisions and lifestyles, sharing some of the cost of their elective care and supporting families and neighbours in their health. [125]
Detailing one of the projected scenarios for future health systems, the ‘New Social Contract’, the report delineates
. . .governments maintain publicly funded health systems in exchange for a greater regulation of lifestyles. Healthy living becomes a civic duty, with individuals sharing responsibility for their health as part of being a good citizen, similar to obeying the law. Health also becomes a human right – an expressed obligation of the state to provide. Data allow the measurement of “health footprints” or health impact assessments for organizations, communities and individuals. Explicit targets are set for healthy lifestyles, with strong incentives for compliance. [126]
An example of one such incentive is given as the linking of ‘predictive models with consumption data, e.g. Tesco cards for an up to date idea of patient’s risks’. [127] Nudging, behaviour change, ‘health literacy’ education programmes and social/peer pressure (e.g.: ‘make obesity as socially toxic as smoking’ [128]) are also recommended to engineer a health-focussed culture. [129]
To enable ‘the data revolution to reach its full potential’ in healthcare, the report recommends pursuing three policy areas. ‘Pay for data’ (have healthcare systems agree on ‘what is to be measured and pay for it – or, more assertively, not pay, if the associated data are not forthcoming’); [130] ‘open data’ (invest in interoperability standards for IT, link local, national and international data sets and introduce an opt-out system for use of patient data in research); and ‘my data’ (‘Form a coalition of stakeholders to overcome data privacy concerns’, and communicate to the public ‘the enormous potential of the data revolution to save more lives’).
Relevant to the marked emphasis on data gathering and applications, ‘healthy urbanisation’ [131] is another key theme highlighted throughout the report. An increase in rural living for health-promoting lifestyles is seemingly off the table as only healthy cities are considered. As becomes apparent in Part 2 of this series, the WEF’s data powered ‘healthy cities’ — which they say will rewrite ‘community structures, urban planning, local government interventions and education’ — are synonymous with SMART cities.
The Global Health Policy Summit in August 2012 and the Institute of Global Health Innovation reports
Later in the year, the Institute of Global Health Innovation (IGHI) [132] hosted a ‘Global Health Policy Summit’ in London, during the London 2012 Olympic Games. The organisation is one of Imperial College London’s ‘Global Challenge’ Institutes [133] with a stated mission to ‘improve global health and care through evidence-based innovation.’ [134]
Its co-director Lord Ara Warkes Darzi was also on the steering board of the WEF’s Sustainable Health Systems project, as well as leading the World Innovation Summit for Health (both discussed below).
Darzi, who is a field leader in minimally invasive and robot assisted surgery, 134 was tasked with leading a national review to plan the course of the NHS over a decade — the NHS Next Stage Review — between 2007–2009 when he served as Minister for Health in the House of Lords. Leys (co-author of The Plot Against the NHS) described Darzi as merely the ‘front man’ whose reports closely followed a script prepared by a Department of Health team led by Dr Penny Dash, who had been director of strategy in the Department of Health at the time of the NHS Plan, and was then a partner in the London office of McKinsey and Company. [8]
More recently, Darzi was commissioned by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to produce the 2024 report Independent Investigation of the National Health Service in England. [135] He has been a member of Her Majesty’s Most Honourable Privy Council since 2009 [136] and in 2016 was awarded the Order of Merit by the Queen for ‘exceptionally meritorious service towards the advancement of medicine.’ [137]
The guestlist of the event itself included a number of royals from across the world, including Prince Andrew.
In his keynote address to the Global Health Policy Summit in London [138] David Cameron praised the ‘Smart hospitals’ model deployed in Sichuan, China, for delivering care through remote technologies, and announced plans to consult on changing the NHS constitution so that the default setting was for patients’ data to be used for research unless the patient opts out, in line with the WEF and IGHI’s recommendations. [139]
The key themes of discussion at the summit are summarised for the benefit of their target audience of ‘health ministries, regulators, industry leaders, and entrepreneurs interested in forging a more effective and efficient health system’ [140] in a series of reports by five working groups. These were Creating Sustainable Health and Care Systems in Ageing Societies; [141] A Neglected Resource: Transforming Healthcare Through Human Capital; [142] The Digital Dimension of Healthcare; [143] Countering Non-Communicable Diseases through Innovation; [144] and Saving Mothers’ Lives: Transforming Strategy into Action. [145]
The reports provide a fairly comprehensive initiation into the agenda for a ‘sustainable’ home and community based, ‘co-produced’ and ‘innovative’, technology-mediated healthcare model. The research of the ‘International Partnership for Innovative Healthcare Delivery’ (now renamed ‘Innovations in Healthcare’), launched one year earlier, and comprising Duke University, the WEF and McKinsey [146] is drawn on in the reports. [147]
The below table provides a useful summary of the key recommendations made in A Neglected Resource: Transforming Healthcare Through Human Capital.
Concerningly, it endorses the deskilling of medical professionals and allowing ‘organisations responsible for population health and for actually providing healthcare’ to set the curriculum of medical training institutions, in place of professional institutions: [148]
Governments should ensure that the people with responsibility for the wider health system, especially those planning future models of care delivery, are given greater influence over education, training, credentialing, and standards for health professionals. [149]
Financially incentivising ‘email, phone, Web and group encounters as the norm’, to ‘speed up the adoption of more efficient service models in place of face-to-face contact models’, 149 is another recommendation.
The Digital Dimensions of Healthcare report, whose foreword is co-written/signed by George Halvorson — then CEO of Kaiser Permanente — likewise suggests, ‘One way of stimulating the implementation of proven digital innovations is to adopt a system of outcome-based payments.’ [150] The form of outcome-based payments, ‘social impact bonds’, are specifically mentioned in the Creating Sustainable Health and Care Systems in Ageing Societies report as a potential ‘external source of finance deployed to pay for the development of new, lower-cost preventative services’, with the investor repaid ‘with interest from the savings generated by the re-shaping of the old system.’ [151] This, as part of a shift to preventative care which will involve ‘changing the workforce, buildings, and attitudes’.
To get round the ‘medical-device regulations’ [152] that medical apps would be subject to, marketing such apps as ‘social, behavioural, or informational tool’[s] rather than medical devices, is recommended, in order to benefit from the attendant ‘lower level of regulatory scrutiny’.
The creators of the report’s central attitude towards patients and their unconditional right to access healthcare is conveyed quite explicitly when they state, ‘Currently, very few healthcare-delivery models view the patient as a resource. . . Across all forms of healthcare, the role of the patient needs to change from a liability to an asset.’ [153]
According to the Institute of Global Health Innovation, such a vision of health-related human capital extraction must entail, ‘harness[ing] the capacity of patients and communities to be effective change-agents’; [154] creating ‘social movements’ to advocate for the regulatory approval of innovations such as the polypill (combination drug); [155] trialling the use of personal health and social care budgets to ‘facilitate the integration of care, by using fewer and less expensively trained people’; [156] turning patients into ‘useful members of the healthcare team’ [157] and extracting value from the ‘gift economy’, and the ‘torrent of sharing and volunteer efforts’ unleashed by the internet. [158]
It also necessitates ‘overcoming resistance to data mining’ through ‘some form of social contract being agreed so people understand the benefits to be gained from commoditising their personal information.’ [159]
On the topic of diffusing innovative approaches in the Countering Non-Communicable Disease Through Innovation report, it is acknowledged that low and middle-income countries, ‘less shackled by legacy labour practices and infrastructure’, [160] such as hospital and physician based services for cardiovascular disease, are likely to prove ‘more fertile grounds’ than ‘established health systems’. [159]
The below table summarises the view from the report authors on ‘How health systems need to change to be better able to prevent and manage NCD’ [Non Communicable Disease]:
The authors recognise that resistance to such withdrawal of professional care could be met with from ‘incumbents’, who may ‘react defensively by questioning the safety of the new approach’, which risks undermining ‘the confidence of patients to manage their own condition.’ They advise how to overcome this through means such as getting on board ‘Professional medical staff. . .who are prepared to argue against their colleagues, and in favour of the efficacy and safety of self-management’, elaborating, ‘Ideally, such backing should come from the highest ranks of the profession – and not just nationally but internationally too.’ [161]
The Inaugural World Innovation Summit for Health and Big Data and Health working group report in 2013
The successor to the IGHI summit — the World Innovation Summit for Health (WISH) — was also hosted by Lord Darzi in the following year. The WISH launch was in partnership with the Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development, a state led non-profit organisation, which Darzi is on the advisory board for. Keynote speakers at the 2013 event included Simon Stevens and Boris Johnson. WISH have continued to hold bi-annual summits since. [162]
The report produced by the WISH Big Data and Health working group, Big Data and Health: Revolutionizing Medicine and Public Health, [163] which develops ‘policy recommendations to overcome the barriers in the intersection of Big Data, health, and medicine’, and the background of some of its contributors, merits further scrutiny.
Professor Alex Pentland is one of its three named authors and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Media Lab, at which Pentland directs the Human Dynamics Laboratory subdivision, [164] is one of WISH’s listed academic partners — along with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and NHS National Institute for Health Research.
Alex ‘Sandy’ Pentland has been named one of the seven most powerful data scientists in the world by Forbes in 2012, [165] and was one of the UN Secretary General’s ‘Data Revolutionaries’ that helped forge the ‘transparency and accountability’ mechanisms in the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. [166] He is credited as the father of the field of ‘social physics’: ‘The new science of idea flow, offering revolutionary insights into. . .collective intelligence and social influence’. [167] He wrote a book on the subject called, ‘Social Physics: How Good Ideas Spread – The Lessons From A New Science’ [168] and more recently co-authored ‘Building The New Economy: Data As Capital’. [169]
His extensive body of published research reveals a prominent focus on facial recognition systems in smart environments; [170] the predictive capabilities of collated smartphone data including for crime [171] and personality profiling; [172] mapping of social systems and dynamics through smart surveillance; [173] [174] and other applications of wearable computing, particularly for health [175] — with his MIT media lab research group developing ‘healthwear: wearable systems with sensors that can continuously monitor the user’s vital signs, motor activity, social interactions, sleep patterns, and other health indicators.’ [176] Pentland co-founded the Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers Computer Society’s Technical Committee on Wearable Information Systems. [177]
His more recent published research focussed on reviewing COVID-19 infection spread mitigations in the U.S, with findings that supported the efficacy of such measures. One study showed an association between mask mandates and ‘a statistically significant decrease in new cases’; [178] and another demonstrated positive impacts of testing, contact tracing, and quarantine measures on second waves of COVID-19. [179]
As early as a decade prior (2010) to the COVID-19 event, Pentland published research proposing a ‘novel application of ubiquitous computing’, for ‘epidemiological behaviour change’, which used ‘mobile phone based co-location and communication sensing’ to predict the health status of an individual — with the goal of formulating ‘social interventions’ that would prevent flu patients from mixing with others. [180]
Similar such themes are explored in the Big Data report, which states, ‘Reality-mining tools. . . could assist in the detection of disease outbreaks.’ [181] Reality-mining is described as the collation of ‘billions of digital traces’ from sources such as, ‘sensors in cell phones, security cameras, “smart card” readers, digital wallets, loyalty cards, smart electricity meters. . .large-scale e-commerce’, and, ‘data generated from online social networks, internet documents, digital video, and digital photography’. [182]
Significantly, smart phones are characterised in the report as ‘real-time behaviour-sensing systems.’
It goes on to suggest that acute illnesses such as influenza, which cause sufferers to reduce their mobility patterns or change their communication behavior, can be identified from several types of ‘reality-monitoring data streams’:
At the individual level, the emergency-room or clinical-intake process would include an examination of data about an individual’s exposure summary and indicate, for example, if the patient had eaten or spent much time near known outbreak areas. . .In the future, such tools could offer a formidable defense against pandemics. [183]
The below map is from a MIT campus study, which depicts the risk of contracting infectious disease based on cell phone mobility patterns of individuals.
The report sets out that, ‘Data about human behavior and belief, together with electronic medical records (EMRs) and genomics information. . . [can] provide us with new opportunities and methods for encouraging healthy behavior, and new capabilities for medical intervention.’ [184] Qatar is held up as a model example of this system, with its personalised health plans developed from data mined from disparate sources including social media, and adherence typically encouraged through phone-based alerts delivered by an animated character or health avatar. [185]
Utilising ‘the scientific method as currently practiced in the health sciences’, is viewed as inadequate to achieve such goals, with the ‘traditional framework of treatment-control experiments’ seen as liable to ‘collapse in an era of Big Data’.
Instead ‘Living labs’ — ‘the Big Data equivalent of real-time functional MRI scanning’ [186] — is the experimental solution proposed; a research concept originated by Pentland and MIT colleagues.
The report asks the question ‘What is a living lab?’ and answers it with the following explanation:
Imagine being able to place an imaging chamber around an entire community, and to record, analyze, and display every facet and dimension of individual behavior, genetic background, and every medical measurement within the member population. And imagine doing that for several years, while the members of the community go about their everyday lives. [187]
A case study of a living lab pilot is explored later in the report at the ‘Center for Assessment Technology of Continuous Health (CATCH) Living Labs for health’: an academic partnership between Massachusetts General Hospital (Boston, US) the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and private partnerships including Pfizer, Siemens, Merck, a number of Venture Capital firms, and sensor and device manufacturers. [188]
The CATCH projects combined ‘passive and active analytics with very sophisticated molecular and genetics assessment’, [189] alongside ‘several classes of potentially sensitive data in addition to traditional patient health information’, including questionnaires on symptoms; GPS location; metadata on smartphone communications; and, ‘passive behavioral and activity measurements obtained through a smartphone app’. The stated goal of utilising these analytics was to ‘help shift some of the management performed in hospitals and clinics to the hands of patients for more personalised medicine.’ [190]
Whilst lip service is paid to privacy concerns in the report, the authors also admit that the category of ‘Government Secret Data’ may be dramatically expanded through the advent of Big Data health systems to include — in addition to ‘tax data, detailed census data, detailed expenditures, and social health factors’ — ‘all types of individual behavior data.’ [190]
The report recommends pooling, ‘unrestricted government data and non-proprietary private data in an open data commons, in order to promote development of a “Big Data” health ecosystem’. It also advocates for the creation of ‘an international Charter for Open Data Sharing, which specifies best practice, and commits nations to sharing health data for their mutual benefit.’ [191]
The below infographic illustrates their proposed Big Data taxonomy and data flow between the categories:
Notably, in 2015, in the month following the U.N. General Assembly’s adoption of the 17 new Sustainable Development Goals, 17 governments of countries, states and cities signed up to an ‘Open Data Charter’ at the Open Government Partnerships Summit. [192] This number has since swelled to 172 by 2025, [193] with the UK being one of the earliest signatories of the charter in June 2013. [194]
The 6th of its 12 principles promises to use data to support ‘the creation and strengthening of new markets, enterprises, and jobs’, to promote ‘inclusive economic growth’, with benefits envisaged to ‘empower governments, citizens, and civil society and private sector organizations to work toward better outcomes for public services in areas such as health, education, public safety, environmental protection, human rights, and natural disasters’. [195]
Part 1.2 of this series continues tracking the progress of NHS capture through examining key pieces of enabling legislation, reviews, pandemic preparedness exercises, and NHS plans from 2014-2019.
[1] ZedPheonix1. The new NHS world order – Scandal. Rumble; 2022. [Online video]: https://rumble.com/vtno0z-the-new-nhs-world-order-scandal.html
[2] McDowell, A. ‘Wrench in the Gears.’ 2016-present. [Online]: https://wrenchinthegears.com/
[3] Garcia, E. ‘The Dystopian Cashless Future we must Fight: 5G, the Metaverse, and the Tokenised Impact Economy.’ Real Left; 22 November 2023. [Online]: https://real-left.com/the-dystopian-cashless-future-we-must-fight-5g-the-metaverse-and-the-tokenised-impact-economy/
[4] Hope, P., Bamford, SM., Beales, S., Brett, K., Kneale, D., et al. Creating sustainable health and care systems in ageing societies: Report of the ageing societies working group. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/Ageing.pdf p. 30
[5] Ibid.
[6] Keep Our NHS Public. ‘Rationing.’ [Online]: https://keepournhspublic.com/privatisation/rationing/
[7] The Great NHS Heist. The great NHS heist. 23 September 2021. [Online video]:
[8] Leys, C., Player, S. The plot against the NHS. The Merlin Press Ltd; 2011.
[9] Player S. ‘How Simon Stevens Imposed a Reorganisation Designed for Transnational Capitalism on England’s NHS.’ The Socialist Health Association; 31 October 2021. [Online]: https://sochealth.co.uk/2017/05/25/truth-stps-simon-stevens-imposed-reorganisation-designed-transnational-capitalism-englands-nhs-stewart-player/ (https://archive.is/Btfg3)
[10] Leys, C. ‘The Plot Against the NHS.’ Open Democracy; 8 April 2011. [Online]: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/plot-against-nhs/ (https://archive.is/M40cj)
[11] Kocheva, D. ‘What is Health 4.0?’ Healthcare Global Magazine; 14 August 2021. [Online]: https://healthcare-digital.com/digital-healthcare/what-health-40 (https://archive.is/eUmXA)
[12] UK Israel Business, All-Party Britain-Israel Parliamentary Group. A shot in the arm: Israel and UK healthtech innovation. 2021. [Online]: https://www.ukisrael.biz/_files/ugd/6c2eb5_b117fba385a4488ead12ef3c6850acaf.pdf p. 8
[13] Schwab, K., Vanham, P. ‘What is Stakeholder Capitalism?’ World Economic Forum; 22 January 2021. [Online]: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2021/01/klaus-schwab-on-what-is-stakeholder-capitalism-history-relevance/ (https://archive.is/YWPhQ)
[14] Keep Our NHS Public. Corporate agenda for integrated care. April 2021. [Online]: https://keepournhspublic.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Corporate_Agenda_for_Integrated_Care-1.pdf p. 8
[15] Centre for Policy Studies. ‘Who are we.’ [Online]: https://cps.org.uk/about/ (https://archive.is/mtXDH)
[16] Joseph, K., Conservative Party Archive. ‘Minutes and papers of the Economic Reconstruction Group, May-Nov 1975.’ Bodleian Libraries; 2022 April 4. [Online]: https://archives.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/repositories/2/archival_objects/144014
[17] Ridley, N. Report of nationalised industries policy group (leaked Ridley report). London; 1977 Archive; Thatcher MSS. [Online]: https://archive.margaretthatcher.org/doc02/FABEA1F4BFA64CB398DFA20D8B8B6C98.pdf p. 15
[18] Letwin, O., Redwood, J. Britain’s biggest enterprise: ideas for radical reform of the NHS. London; 1988. [Online]: https://cps.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/111027171245-BritainsBiggestEnterprise1988.pdf
[19] The Great NHS Heist. The great NHS heist. Youtube. 2021. [Online video]:
(Timestamp, from 08:00)
[20] Ferguson, N. The House of Rothschild: The world’s greatest banker 1849-1999. New York: Penguin; 2000. p. 493
[21] Letwin. O., Redwood, J. Britain’s biggest enterprise: ideas for radical reform of the NHS. London; 1988. [Online]: https://cps.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/111027171245-BritainsBiggestEnterprise1988.pdf p. 19
[22] Wikipedia. ‘Personal Health Budgets.’ (Last updated 2024 May 10 at time of publishing.) [Online]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_health_budgets (https://archive.is/ooGQv)
[23] Corp, R. ‘National Insurance to Rise Next Year after MPs’ Vote.’ 8 September 2021. [Online]: https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-58485278 (https://archive.is/voAQ0)
[24] Wikipedia. ‘Health and Social Care Levy.’ (Last edited 26 December 2024 at time of publishing.) [Online]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_and_Social_Care_Levy (https://archive.is/pg6At)
[25] Lister, J. ‘How Thatcher Unleashed the NHS Outsourcing Wave.’ Tribune Magazine; 5 December 2020. [Online]: https://tribunemag.co.uk/2020/12/thatcher-nhs-outsourcing-wave/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20201205110218/https://tribunemag.co.uk/2020/12/thatcher-nhs-outsourcing-wave/)
[26] Great Britain. The NHS and Community Care Act (1990). London; The Stationary Office. [Online]: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/19/contents
[27] Furse, J. ‘The NHS Dismantled.’ London Review of Books. 7 November 2019. [Online]: https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v41/n21/john-furse/the-nhs-dismantled (https://archive.is/PMQJN)
[28] Goulden, B. ‘Lecturer Hits Out over “Extortionate” Expense of PFIs; HEALTH: Academic Criticises Schemes as he Launches New Book on NHS.’ The Free Library; 2008. [Online]: https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Lecturer+hits+out+over’+extortionate’+expense+of+PFIs;+HEALTH:...-a0179477937 (https://archive.is/H9I7u)
[29] Harrington, D. ‘How Much of the NHS in England Has Already Been Privatised?’ Public Matters; 8 October 2019. [Online]: https://publicmatters.org.uk/2019/10/08/how-much-of-the-nhs-in-england-has-already-been-privatised/ (https://archive.is/u2kQs)
[30] Great Britain. The NHS Plan: A plan for investment. A plan for reform (2000). London; The Stationary Office. [Online]: https://lampardinquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/WV-25-The-NHS-Plan-A-Plan-for-Investment-A-Plan-for-Reform.pdf
[31] Great Britain. Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003. London; The Stationary Office. [Online]: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/43/contents (https://web.archive.org/web/20101006041911/https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/43/contents)
[32] Pollock, A., Price, D., Talbot-Smith, A., Mohan, J. ‘NHS and the Health and Social Care Bill: End of Bevan’s Vision?’ British Medical Journal; 25 October 2003. [Online]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC259173/ (https://archive.is/iuDe2)
[33] Harrington, D. ‘How Much of the NHS in England has Already Been Privatised?’ Public Matters; 8 October 2019. [Online]: https://publicmatters.org.uk/2019/10/08/how-much-of-the-nhs-in-england-has-already-been-privatised/ (https://archive.is/u2kQs)
[34] Pollock, A., Roderick, P. ‘Dismantling the National Health Service in England.’ International Journal of Health Services; July 2022. [Online]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362246890_Dismantling_the_National_Health_Service_in_England p. 471
[35] Harrington, D., Ormerod, J. ‘Accountable Care Organisations: Their Potential Impact on Delivery of Health and Social Care to Patients in England’s NHS.’ Public Matters; January 2018. [Online]: https://publicmatters.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Accountable-Care-Organisations-briefing-final.pdf p. 13
[36] Ham, C. Working together for health: achievements and challenges in the Kaiser NHS Beacon Sites Programme. Health Services Management Centre; University of Birmingham; January 2010. [Online]: http://epapers.bham.ac.uk/749/1/Kaiser_policy_paper_Jan_2010.pdf
[37] Keep Our NHS Public. Corporate agenda for integrated care. [Online]: https://keepournhspublic.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Corporate_Agenda_for_Integrated_Care-1.pdf p. 10
[38] Public Matters. Health & Care Bill 2021: the NHS, the law and democracy. Youtube. [Online video]:
(Timestamp, from 03:10.)
[39] Ibid., (Timestamp, from 03:45.)
[40] Kaiser Permanente. ‘Our Impact in Communities.’ [Online]: https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/expertise-and-impact/healthy-communities/improving-community-conditions/economic-opportunity (https://archive.is/HEidB)
[41] Kaiser Permanente. ‘Housing for health.’ [Online]: https://about.kaiserpermanente.org/expertise-and-impact/healthy-communities/improving-community-conditions/housing-security) (https://archive.is/AMR0J)
[42] Pollock, A., Roderick, P. ‘Dismantling the National Health Service in England.’ International Journal of Health Services; July 2022. [Online]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362246890_Dismantling_the_National_Health_Service_in_England p. 471
[43] Cooper, C. ‘Ex-Blair adviser Simon Stevens who is linked to US healthcare giant is new NHS boss.’ The Independent; 24 October 2013. [Online]: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/exblair-adviser-simon-stevens-who-is-linked-to-us-healthcare-giant-is-new-nhs-boss-8899875.html (https://archive.is/7okXu)
[44] World Economic Forum in collaboration with Mckinsey and Company. The financial sustainability of health systems: A case for change. 2012. [Online]: https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_HE_SustainabilityHealthSystems_Report_2012.pdf p. 18
[45] World Economic Forum in collaboration with Boston Consulting Group. Value in healthcare: Accelerating the pace of health system transformation. December 2018. [Online]: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Value_in_Healthcare_report_2018.pdf p. 30
[46] McBeth, R. ‘Stevens Launches Innovation “Test Beds”.’ Digital Health; 22 January 2016. [Online]: https://www.digitalhealth.net/2016/01/stevens-launches-innovation-test-beds/ (https://archive.is/JvP14)
[47] Harrington, D. ‘Another “fudge” for the NHS as Simon Stevens takes over NHS Improvement.’ Public Matters; 3 March 2019. [Online]: https://publicmatters.org.uk/2019/03/03/another-worrying-fudge-for-the-nhs-as-simon-stevens-takes-over-nhs-improvement/ (https://archive.is/3kpff)
[48] BBC News. ‘New Year Honours 2020: NHS Chief Knighted.’ 27 December 2019. [Online]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-50925504 (https://archive.is/4cOZd)
[49] Ayling, M., Liddell, A., Reid, G., Department of Health, NHS Improvement & Efficiency Directorate, Innovation and Service Improvement. Innovation, health and wealth: Accelerating adoption & diffusion in the NHS. 5 December 2011. [Online]; Available to download at: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130107013731/http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_131299
[50] The Dept of Business, Innovation and Skills. The Plan For Growth. London: The Stationary Office; March 2011. [Online]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/221514/2011budget_growth.pdf p. 96
[51] Ibid., p. 7
[52] Ibid., p. 7
[53] Ayling, M., Liddell, A., Reid, G., Department of Health, NHS Improvement & Efficiency Directorate, Innovation and Service Improvement. Innovation, health and wealth: Accelerating adoption & diffusion in the NHS. 5 December 2011. [Online]; Available to download at: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130107013731/http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_131299 p. 26 of report.
[54] Whitfield, L. ‘Money found for NHS innovation.’ Digital Health; 28 April 2009. [Online]: https://www.digitalhealth.net/2009/04/money-found-for-nhs-innovation/ (https://archive.is/3k9OB)
[55] Ibid.
[56] Ayling, M., Liddell, A., Reid, G., Department of Health, NHS Improvement & Efficiency Directorate, Innovation and Service Improvement. Innovation, health and wealth: Accelerating adoption & diffusion in the NHS. 5 December 2011. [Online]; Available to download at: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130107013731/http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_131299 p. 27 of report.
[57] The Academic Health Science Network. AHSN Network Strategy 2021-2026. 30th March 2021. [Online]: https://thehealthinnovationnetwork.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/AHSN-Network-Strategy-2021-26-.pdf P10
[58] Ayling, M., Liddell, A., Reid, G., Department of Health, NHS Improvement & Efficiency Directorate, Innovation and Service Improvement. Innovation, health and wealth: Accelerating adoption & diffusion in the NHS. 5 December 2011. [Online]; Available to download at: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130107013731/http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_131299 p. 9 of report.
[59] Ibid., p. 27
[60] Ibid., p. 14
[61] Ibid., p. 18
[62] Ibid., p. 32
[63] Demos. ‘Sir Geoff Mulgan.’ Demos. [Online]: https://demos.co.uk/people/geoff-mulgan-2/ (https://archive.is/Pz3iX)
[64] Mulgan G. ‘Books.’ [Online]: https://www.geoffmulgan.com/books (https://archive.is/hrbxk)
[65] Mulgan G. ‘Organisations.’ [Online]: https://www.geoffmulgan.org/organisations (https://archive.is/qNnat)
[66] Mulgan G. ‘About.’ [Online]: https://www.geoffmulgan.org/about (https://archive.is/VCoe9)
[67] UCL Engineering. ‘Professor Geoff Mulgan receives Knighthood in Queen’s Birthday Honours.’ 12 October 2020. [Online]: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/engineering/news/2020/oct/professor-geoff-mulgan-receives-knighthood-queens-birthday-honours (https://archive.is/DPB7a)
[68] Demos Helsinki/ Mulgan G. Generative shared intelligence (GSI): A direction for governments in the uncertain environment of the late 2020s. July 2024. [Online]: https://demoshelsinki.fi/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Demos-Helsinki-Generative-shared-intelligence-and-the-future-shape-of-government-Geoff-Mulgan.pdf
[69] Ibid., p. 19
[70] Mulgan, G. ‘Ideas: Governments: Global Governments.’ [Online]: https://www.geoffmulgan.org/ideas (https://archive.is/oe4N0)
[71] Demos Helsinki/ Mulgan G. Generative shared intelligence (GSI) A direction for governments in the uncertain environment of the late 2020s. July 2024. [Online]: https://demoshelsinki.fi/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Demos-Helsinki-Generative-shared-intelligence-and-the-future-shape-of-government-Geoff-Mulgan.pdf p. 5
[72] Ibid., p. 6
[73] Ibid., p. 10
[74] Ibid., p. 7
[75] Ibid., p. 10
[76] Mulgan, G. ‘Ideas: Civil Societies: Social Finance and Social Impact Bonds.’ https://www.geoffmulgan.com/faqs-2
[77] Nesta. ‘A Brief History of Nesta.’ [Online]: https://www.nesta.org.uk/brief-history-nesta/ (https://archive.is/n9VtF)
[78] Nesta. ‘Impact investment.’ [Online]: https://www.nesta.org.uk/feature/innovation-methods/impact-investment/ (https://archive.is/TfK4E)
[79] Ibid.
[80] Mulgan, G. ‘Why we need New Data and Knowledge Infrastructures to Achieve the SDGs.’ Nesta; 25 November 2019. [Online]: https://www.nesta.org.uk/blog/why-we-need-new-data-and-knowledge-infrastructures-achieve-sdgs/
[81] BBC News. ‘”Nudge unit” Sold off to Charity and Employees.’ 5 February 2014. [Online]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26030205 (https://archive.is/98dGT)
[82] Nesta. ‘Nesta acquires Behavioural Insights Team to help tackle UK’s biggest social challenges.’ 13 December 2021. [Online]: https://www.nesta.org.uk/press-release/nesta-acquires-behavioural-insights-team/ (https://archive.is/Yo4Pn)
[83] Ayling, M., Liddell, A., Reid, G., Department of Health, NHS Improvement & Efficiency Directorate, Innovation and Service Improvement. Innovation, health and wealth: Accelerating adoption & diffusion in the NHS. 5 December 2011. [Online]; Available to download at: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130107013731/http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_131299 p. 21 of report.
[84] Ibid., p. 21
[85] NHS England. ‘NHS Innovation Lab.’ [Online]: https://transform.england.nhs.uk/innovation-lab/ (https://archive.is/uhlAz)
[86] Armstrong H, Rae J, Nesta. A working model for anticipatory regulation: A working paper. November 2017. [Online]: https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/working_model_for_anticipatory_regulation_0.pdf
[87] Ibid., p. 8
[88] Baeck, P., Colligan, P., Puttick R, Nesta. I-teams: the teams and funds making innovation happen in governments around the world Nesta; 2014. [Online]: https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/i-teams_june_2014.pdf p. 54
[89] Ibid., p. 54
[90] Ibid., p. 5
[91] Ibid., p. 21
[92] Hallsworth, M. ‘Reducing Antibiotic Prescribing: a New BIT study Published in The Lancet.’ Behavioural Insights Team; 19 Feb 2016. [Online]: https://www.bi.team/blogs/1516/ (https://archive.is/zx6EU)
[93] Mcdowell, A. ‘The Brothers Grimm: Bill and Mike’s Pandemic Panopticon.’ Wrench in the Gears; 17 May 2020. [Online]: https://wrenchinthegears.com/2020/05/17/the-brothers-grim-bill-and-mikes-pandemic-panopticon/ (https://archive.is/aR77V)
[94] Bloomberg Philanthropies. ‘What Works Cities Certification.’ [Online]: https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/ (https://archive.is/nIMsU)
[95] Bloomberg Philanthropies, WHO, Vital Strategies. Partnership for healthy cities: Policy intervention list. [Online]: https://cities4health.org/assets/main/documents/phc-interventionlist_eng_final.pdf p. 4
[96] Unesco. ‘Financing the Digital Transformation of Education: Social Impact Bond Project at Rikers Island.’ [Online]: https://www.unesco.org/en/dtc-financing-toolkit/social-impact-bond-project-rikers-island (https://archive.is/emnTA)
[97] Smith, M. ‘Tory Policy Chief Oliver Letwin Wrote a “Blueprint” for NHS Privatization.’ The Mirror; 8 January 2016. [Online]: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-policy-chief-oliver-letwin-7141244 (https://archive.is/ofjtd)
[98] Cabinet Office Behavioural Insights Team. Applying behavioural insight to health. London: The Stationary Office; 2010. [Online]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/60524/403936_BehaviouralInsight_acc.pdf
[99] Ibid., p. 20
[100] Public Matters. Health and Care Bill 2021: the NHS, the law, and democracy. 26 July 2021. [Online video]:
(Timestamp, from 04:40.)
[101] The Great NHS Heist. The great NHS heist. 23 September 2021. [Online video]:
(Timestamp, from 49:15)
[102] Ibid. (Timestamp, from 54:07)
[103] Great Britain. The Health and Social Care Act 2012. London: The Stationary Office; July 2012. [Online]: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/7/contents
[104] Keep Our NHS Public. ‘Health and Social Care Act 2012.’ [Online]: https://keepournhspublic.com/privatisation/health-and-social-care-act-2012/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20210301051105/https://keepournhspublic.com/privatisation/health-and-social-care-act-2012/)
[105] Patients 4 NHS. ‘How is the NHS being Privatised?’ (Last updated 2021 at time of publishing.) [Online]: https://www.patients4nhs.org.uk/how-is-the-nhs-being-privatised/ (https://archive.is/BWhRu)
[106] Pollock, A., Roderick, P. ‘Dismantling the National Health Service in England.’ International Journal of Health Services; July 2022. [Online]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362246890_Dismantling_the_National_Health_Service_in_England p. 472
[107] Great Britain. Health and Social Care Act 2012: Part 9, Chapter 2. London: The Stationary Office. 2012. [Online]: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/7/part/9/enacted
[108] NHS England. ‘Section 15: The Health and Social Care Information Centre’s Powers under the Health and Social Care Act.’ [Online]: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/looking-after-information/data-security-and-information-governance/codes-of-practice-for-handling-information-in-health-and-care/a-guide-to-confidentiality-in-health-and-social-care/hscic-guide-to-confidentiality-references/section-15
[109] MedConfidential. ‘What’s the Story?’ [Online]: https://medconfidential.org/whats-the-story/ (https://archive.is/4XeoP)
[110] MedConfidential. ‘Major Health Data Breaches and Scandals.’ [Online]: https://medconfidential.org/for-patients/major-health-data-breaches-and-scandals/ (https://archive.is/5VVvA)
[111] Med Confidential. ‘Health data, AI, and Google DeepMind.’ [Online]: https://medconfidential.org/whats-the-story/health-data-ai-and-google-deepmind/ (https://archive.is/u6hzR)
[112] Wikipedia. ‘Clinical Practice Research Datalink.’ (Last edited 14 March 2025 at time of publishing.) [Online]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_Practice_Research_Datalink (https://archive.is/lNhk3)
[113] Phil. ‘Free Text, CPRD and Yet Another Threat to Medical Confidentiality. Medconfidential; 30 March 2014. [Online]: https://medconfidential.org/2014/free-text-cprd-and-yet-another-threat-to-medical-confidentiality/ (https://archive.is/1HKwC)
[114] Raynaud, O. ‘Davos 2012: Transforming the Global Healthcare Landscape.’ World Economic Forum; 25 January 2012. [Online]: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2012/01/davos-2012-transforming-the-global-healthcare-landscape/ (https://archive.is/zv7KN)
[115] Henke, N., Kibasi, T., Teitelbaum, J., and the World Economic Forum in collaboration with McKinsey and company. The financial sustainability of health systems: A case for change. 2012. [Online]: https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_HE_SustainabilityHealthSystems_Report_2012.pdf
[116] Ibid., p. 18
[117] Ibid., p. 18
[118] Ibid., p. 9
[119] Ibid., p. 12
[120] Ibid., p. 15
[121] Ibid., p. 15
[122] Abdasi, K. and the World Economic Forum in Collaboration with McKinsey and Company. Sustainable health systems: Visions, strategies, critical uncertainties and scenarios: A report from the World Economic Forum. and Company. January 2013. [Online]: https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_SustainableHealthSystems_Report_2013.pdf p. 27
[123] Ibid., p. 29
[124] Ibid., p. 27
[125] Ibid., p. 9
[126] Ibid., p. 23
[127] Ibid., p. 11
[128] Ibid., p. 16
[129] Ibid., pp. 11, 16
[130] Ibid., p. 13
[131] Ibid., p. 16
[132] Imperial College. ‘Institute of Global Health Innovation.’ [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/global-health-innovation/ (https://archive.is/hv5XG)
[133] Imperial College. ‘Global Challenge Institutes.’ 2025. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/research-and-innovation/about-imperial-research/global-institutes/ (https://shorturl.at/NvsP6)
[134] Wikipedia. ‘Institute of Global Health Innovation.’ (Last edited 18 July 2025 at time of publishing.) [Online]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Global_Health_Innovation (https://archive.is/92Uvk)
[135] Darzi, AW. Independent investigation of the National Health Service in England. London: The Stationary Office; September 2024. [Online]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66f42ae630536cb92748271f/Lord-Darzi-Independent-Investigation-of-the-National-Health-Service-in-England-Updated-25-September.pdf
[136] Wikipedia. ‘List of Current Members of the British Privy Council.’ (Last edited 27 July 2025 at time of publishing.) [Online]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_members_of_the_British_Privy_Council (https://archive.is/DNQQe)
[137] UK government. ‘Non-Executive Director, Monitor: Professor the Lord Darzi OM KBE PC FRS FMedSci HonFREng.’ [Online]: https://www.gov.uk/government/people/professor-the-lord-darzi-of-denham-pc-kbe-frs-fmedsci-honfreng (https://archive.is/MUlwf)
[138] The Rt Hon Lord Cameron. ‘PM speech at Global Health Policy Summit.’ Cabinet Office, UK Gov; 1 August 2012. [Online]: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-at-global-health-policy-summit (https://archive.is/IxDuS)
[139] Becker, D., Close, K., Goldsbrough, P., Halvorson, G., Kennedy, S., Kent, J. The digital dimension of healthcare: Report of the innovation in healthcare working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/Digital-Dimension.pdf p. 19
[140] Barlett, R., Dzau, J., Grazin, N., Henke, N., Pettigrew, M., Udayakumar, K. A neglected resource: Transforming healthcare through human capital. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]:
[141] Bamford, SM., Beales, S., Brett, K., Hope, P., Mckeon, A., Kneale, D., Macdonnell, M. Creating sustainable health and care systems in ageing societies: Report of the ageing societies working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/Ageing.pdf
[142] Barlett, R., Dzau, J., Grazin, N., Henke, N., Pettigrew, M., Udayakumar, K. A neglected resource: Transforming healthcare through human capital. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/human-capital.pdf
[143] Becker, D., Close, K., Goldsbrough, P., Halvorson, G., Kennedy, S., Kent, J. The digital dimension of healthcare: Report of the innovation in healthcare working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/Digital-Dimension.pdf
[144] Corrigan, P., Exeter, C., Smith, R. Countering non-communicable disease through innovation: Report of the non-communicable disease working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/NCD-report.pdf
[145] Arulkumaran, S., Hediger, V., Manzoor, A., May, J. Saving mother’s lives: Transforming strategy into action. Report of the maternal health working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/Mothers-lives.pdf
[146] Innovations in Healthcare. ‘Innovations in Healthcare.’ [Online]: https://www.innovationsinhealthcare.org/
[147] Barlett, R., Dzau, J., Grazin, N., Henke, N., Pettigrew, M., Udayakumar, K. A neglected resource: Transforming healthcare through human capital. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/human-capital.pdf p. 4
[148] Ibid., p. 23
[149] Ibid., p. 24
[150] Becker, D., Close, K., Goldsbrough, P., Halvorson, G., Kennedy, S., Kent, J. The digital dimension of healthcare: Report of the innovation in healthcare working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/Digital-Dimension.pdf p. 5
[151] Bamford, SM., Beales, S., Brett, K., Hope, P., Mckeon, A., Kneale, D., Macdonnell, M. Creating sustainable health and care systems in ageing societies: Report of the ageing societies working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/Ageing.pdf p. 30
[152] Becker, D., Close, K., Goldsbrough, P., Halvorson, G., Kennedy, S., Kent, J. The digital dimension of healthcare: Report of the innovation in healthcare working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/Digital-Dimension.pdf p. 21
[153] Barlett, R., Dzau, J., Grazin, N., Henke, N., Pettigrew, M., Udayakumar, K. A neglected resource: Transforming healthcare through human capital. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/human-capital.pdf p. 8
[154] Ibid.
[155] Corrigan, P., Exeter, C., Smith, R. Countering non-communicable disease through innovation: Report of the non-communicable disease working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/NCD-report.pdf p. 23
[156] Barlett, R., Dzau, J., Grazin, N., Henke, N., Pettigrew, M., Udayakumar, K. A neglected resource: Transforming healthcare through human capital. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/human-capital.pdf p. 20
[157] Ibid., p. 21
[158] Becker, D., Close, K., Goldsbrough, P., Halvorson, G., Kennedy, S., Kent, J. The digital dimension of healthcare: Report of the innovation in healthcare working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/Digital-Dimension.pdf p. 15
[159] Corrigan, P., Exeter, C., Smith, R. Countering non-communicable disease through innovation: Report of the non-communicable disease working group 2012. Imperial College; 2012. [Online]: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/public/NCD-report.pdf p. 24
[160] Ibid., p. 20
[161] Ibid., p. 21
[162] World Innovation Summit for Health (WISH). ‘Events.’ [Online]: https://wish.org.qa/events/ (https://archive.is/rhpSW)
[163] Heibeck, T., Pentland, A., Reid, G,T. Big data and health: Revolutionizing medicine and public health. Report of the big data and health working group 2013. WISH. [Online]: https://wish.org.qa/research-report/revolutionizing-medicine-and-public-health/
[164] MIT Management Sloan School. ‘Sandy Pentland.’ [Online]: https://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/directory/sandy-pentland (https://archive.is/tvdHX)
[165] Ibid.
[166] Wikipedia. ‘Alex Pentland.’ (Last edited 5 January 2025 at time of publishing.) [Online]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Pentland (https://archive.is/c5A77)
[167] Penguin Random House. ‘Social Physics by Alex Pentland.’ [Online]: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/314230/social-physics-by-alex-pentland/9780143126331/
[168] Pentland, A. Social physics: how social networks can make us smarter. New York: Penguin books; 2015.
[169] Hardjono, T., Lipton, A., Pentland, A. Building the new economy: Data as capital. The MIT Press; 2021.
[170] Choudhury, T., Pentland, A. ‘Face Recognition for Smart Environments.’ IEEE Computer Society; February 2000. [Online]: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=c1643ad49ab52b7a38e416430583ca6adaaf5a9d
[171] Bogomolov, A., Lepri, B., Oliver, N., Pentland, A., Pianesi, F., Staiano, J. ‘Once Upon a Crime: Towards Crime Prediction from Demographics and Mobile Data.’ DOI:10.1145/2663204.2663254. September 2014. [Online]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.2983
[172] Montjoye, YA., Pentland, A., Quoidbach, J., Robic, F. ‘Predicting Personality Using Novel Mobile Phone-Based Metrics.’ MIT Media Laboratory; 2013. [Online]: http://www2.stat-athens.aueb.gr/~jpan/deMontjoye-2013.pdf
[173] Choudhury, T., Pentland, A. ‘Sensing and Modeling Human Networks using the Sociometer.’ Cambridge MA, USA; 2003. [Online]: https://www.cs.cornell.edu/~tanzeem/pubs/choudhury_iswc2003.pdf
[174] Gloor PA., Olguin Olguin, D., Pentland, A. ‘Capturing Individual and Group Behavior with Wearable Sensors.’ Cambridge MA, USA; Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence; 2009. [Online]: https://cdn.aaai.org/Symposia/Spring/2009/SS-09-04/SS09-04-012.pdf
[175] Gloor PA., Olguin Olguin, D., Pentland, A. ‘Wearable Sensors for Pervasive Healthcare Management.’ Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare; 2009. [Online]: https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/60066/Olguin-2009-Wearable%20sensors%20for%20pervasive%20healthcare%20management.pdf
[176] Pentland A. ‘Healthwear: Medical Technology Becomes Wearable.’ IEEE Computer Society; May 2004. [Online]: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=7208ef7e7e38529ed4299cf2f7619459855c15a1 p. 42
[177] Pentland A. ‘Healthwear: Medical Technology Becomes Wearable.’ IEEE Computer Society; May 2004. [Online]: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=7208ef7e7e38529ed4299cf2f7619459855c15a1 p. 49
[178] Adjodah, D., Chinazzi, M., Dinakar, K., Fraiberger, SP, Pentland, A., Bates, S., et al. ‘Association Between COVID-19 Outcomes and Mask Mandates, Adherence, and Attitudes.’ PLoS ONE 16(6): e0252315. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.025231523. June 2021. [Online]: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252315
[179] Aleta, A., Martín-Corral, D., Pastore y Piontti, A., Pentland, A., et al. ‘Modelling the Impact of Testing, Contact Tracing and Household Quarantine on Second Waves of COVID-19.’ Nature: Human Behaviour 4, 964–971. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0931-9. 5 August 2020. [Online]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-0931-9
[180] Cebrian, M., Lazer, D., Madan, A., Pentland, A. ‘Social Sensing for Epedemiological Behavior Change. Association for Computing Machinery Press’; 2010. [Online]: https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/66087/Pentland_Social%20Sensing.pdf?sequence=1
[181] Heibeck, T., Pentland, A., Reid, GT. Big data and health: Revolutionizing medicine and public health. Report of the big data and health working group 2013. WISH. [Online]: https://wish.org.qa/research-report/revolutionizing-medicine-and-public-health/ p. 9
[182] Ibid., p. 5
[183] Ibid., p. 9
[184] Ibid., p. 6
[185] Ibid., p. 29
[186] Ibid., p. 7
[187] Ibid., p. 6
[188] Ibid., p. 21
[189] Ibid., p. 21
[190] Ibid., p. 15
[191] Ibid., p. 3
[192] Gurin, J. ‘The Open Data Charter: A Roadmap for Using a Global Resource.’ The Huffington Post; 27 October 2015. [Online]: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-open-data-charter-a-r_b_8391470
[193] Open Data Charter. ‘Government Adopters.’ [Online]: https://opendatacharter.org/government-adopters/
[194] Cabinet Office, UK Gov. ‘G8 Open Data Charter.’ 18 June 2013. [Online]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c1dd340f0b61a825d68e7/Open_Data_Charter.pdf
[195] Open Data Charter. ‘ODC Principles.’ [Online]: https://opendatacharter.org/principles/
Once again I find on groping my way through this article, my ferocious mistrust and outright hostility to that pathological degraded mode of rhetoric, the corporate pep talk, filled with terms now forever damned such as "sustainable", "efficient", "affordable", "viable" etc. All a smokescreen through which all is inverted. The late John McMurtry was very good at untangling the disguised reversals of this language in which it was revealed that capitalism is a system that turns living things into dead things.