I'd honestly submit de-anonymized data to PHAC if asked Sure, and that's your prerogative. But how come you get to decide that because you don't see a problem,

I'd honestly submit de-anonymized data to PHAC if asked Sure, and that's your prerogative. But how come you get to decide that because you don't see a problem, that no one should see a problem? Privacy is not about secrecy, it is about agency. Regardless of how it's framed, usage of involuntarily collected data is a violation of agency. I agree that this is a non-story as far as the Canadian Health Authority is concerned. But the data collection itself is not a non-story, so I'm willing to let the story stand because of that. Isn't it funny how "pro-business" (read: sociopathic) news outlets will defend the need for businesses to violate your agency at every turn, but scream bloody murder when a government institution uses that same commercially-harvested data in order to fulfill their function?