Do you believe in a middle ground of informed consent such that data can be shared while mitigating the privacy harms? It allows each patient to make their own decisions, and just like volunteering to be an organ donor, there can be societal benefit without forcing harm on people who do not want to participate.

I don't. I think sharing data should be a mandatory part of receiving services. In order to benefit from the system you must commit to continue to improve it.

I believe that if I cared more about privacy than my life, I wouldn't go to a public institution full of people I objectively cannot trust because I don't personally know them and then put my life in their hands.

Privacy schizos need to stop making up nonsense. All of your diagnosed illnesses are permanently stored in a database that will never ever be deleted until decades after your death. This data is already shared between all hospitals. The moment you step through the hospital door you aren't at home and your privacy fantasies end. Literally any malicious worker could leak your data and then what? Why does this even matter. If I see you in a street, I can tell you're sickly just from the direction you're walking in.

> Sharing patient data harms privacy

Yes, that's a very abstract statement that seems plausible and is easy to make, but how do we know there's significant harm? What are some real-world examples? Can we quantify how much harm is done to patients from sharing too much, versus sharing too little?