Should Anonymized Data Be Used Without Informed Surliability?

Should anonymized data be used freely? This answer, for me, is two-fold. When it comes to the topic of public health surveillance, anonymized data should be used without informed consent. The data tracking methods for public health surveillance help determine pockets of disease and deploy treatment strategies prior to an epidemic. The rationale for this standpoint is that the greater good of the population. In the example of the recent Ebola epidemic, the epicenter of the disease was identified and actions plans were taken to quickly identify and reduce the spread of the disease. This becomes a matter of public safety; therefore, this data needs to be used to protect the health and well-being of populations, even if there is a risk for
Here anonymized data can be used without informed consent; however, further regulation is needed. Money is drives individuals and companies; therefore, capitalizing on profits from the use on anonymized data is only natural. However, there is a risk for re-identification which could potentially be harmful to the source of the data (Fairchild et al., 2017). Therefore, when using anonymized data for sales and marketing purposes; informed consent would be the maximal level of patient awareness and control over the use of his or her data. The patient would themselves be making a decision of whether or not to share their data and they would be aware of the risk or re-identification. However, is obtaining informed consent from each individual feasible and appropriate when the risk of re-identification is very low? At minimum the government needs to impose further regulation on the use of anonymized data for commercial profit. McGraw (2012) stresses the need for transparency in data usage and measures that are in place to address privacy and security concerns to bolster public trust. Informed consent makes the individual aware; however, it does not provide additional data security (McGraw,
Users of social media a publishing data on the Internet that virtually anyone can access. While the social media platform developers track data, is it right to assume that because an individual publishes personal data that is is right for researchers to utilize this data with out the knowledge of the individual? This sparks another ethical dilemma outside the purposes of this paper; however, it is important to be aware that social media is a bountiful source of data for research. Again transparency about the risks of using social media and understanding secondary uses of personal information shared on social media is a co-responsibility between the user and the