In a world where data is the gold, the intentions of tech giants, especially when they intersect with public services, are often met with scrutiny. Such is the case with Palantir, and its relationship with the UK’s National Health Service (NHS), which has ignited a debate on the implications of such a partnership, as recently reported by Steve Boggan at UnHerd.
Peter Thiel, known for his audacious statements, once remarked that the NHS makes people sick, and that the British people’s affection for it resembles Stockholm syndrome. Despite these seemingly disdainful comments, Palantir apparently is on the brink of securing a half-billion pound contract to process NHS health records. This potential alliance between a private American company and the NHS has raised eyebrows, especially given Palantir’s early backing by the CIA.
Cori Crider, director of Foxglove, a group that challenges tech giants, questions Palantir’s suitability for such a pivotal role within the NHS. The company, which initially supported entities like spies, police, and the military, had no prior experience in healthcare. Yet, it now stands alongside companies like Quantexa and Oracle Cerner, competing to develop the “Federated Data Platform” (FDP). As described by the NHS, this platform aims to consolidate operational data, ensuring that NHS staff can access required information in a secure environment.
The NHS, with its £182 billion budget, is a goldmine of health data. Such vast amounts of data have the potential to revolutionise patient care, lead to the discovery of novel treatments, and result in significant savings. However, if mishandled, it could jeopardise patient trust and privacy and even threaten the very essence of the NHS.
Palantir’s journey to this juncture is intriguing. Named after the “seeing stones” from J.R.R Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, the company was envisioned by Thiel as a means to combat terrorism while upholding civil liberties. With the CIA as an early investor, Palantir developed systems like Gotham, used by the FBI, NSA, and even the Ukrainian army in its conflict with Russia. When the pandemic struck, Palantir offered its system, Foundry, to the UK government for a mere £1, showcasing its capabilities in healthcare logistics.
This strategic move allowed Palantir to deeply integrate with the NHS, aiding in the distribution of medicines, ventilators, and vaccines. Dr David Wrigley of the BMA’s GP Committee believes that this initial contract, though seemingly altruistic, provided Palantir with invaluable insights into the workings of the NHS, positioning it favourably for future bids.
Palantir’s association with the UK government didn’t end with the pandemic. They offered their services, free of charge, to assist with the housing of Ukrainian refugees after the Russian invasion. Subsequently, Palantir secured several NHS contracts worth £60 million, bypassing the usual tendering process. This raised concerns, with the National Audit Office highlighting potential issues with such practices.
Thiel’s candid views on the NHS, expressed during a session at the Oxford Union, further complicated matters. He suggested that the NHS was an “iatrogenic” institution, implying that it caused more harm than good. Palantir, however, distanced itself from these comments, with Joanna Peller, the company’s UK health lead, emphasising their commitment to patient data privacy.
The future of the FDP remains uncertain. While Palantir seems to be the frontrunner, concerns about patient data privacy persist. The success of the chosen provider will hinge not just on technological prowess but also on its ability to maintain the trust of patients and healthcare professionals.
The intersection of tech giants with public health services is a double-edged sword. While the technological capabilities of companies like Palantir can undoubtedly revolutionise healthcare logistics and data management, the ethical implications cannot be ignored. The NHS must tread carefully, ensuring that its core values are not compromised in the pursuit of technological advancement. The challenge lies in striking a balance between leveraging cutting-edge technology and preserving the sanctity of patient trust and data privacy.
