Introduction Professor Christopher Hood Chair of the Working Party

Why did we write this report? New developments in genetic research and imaging technology New applications of internet and digital technology in health care Said by some to herald a new era of ‘personalised healthcare’ Raise tricky issues about consumer choice and personal responsibility in health care

Internet users as percentage of population in selected countries

Background to the report 8 person working party 9 meetings over 18 months 3-month public consultation Various kinds of evidence gathering sessions Meeting with leading US experts at Harvard School of Public Health

The report Social context Ethics Intervention Case studies: −Online health information −Online personal health records −Buying medicines online −Telemedicine −Personal genetic profiling −Direct-to-consumer body imaging

In what sense can these technologies deliver ‘personalised healthcare’? Can they deliver: healthcare more closely tailored to our unique individual features? healthcare that treats us as a ‘whole person’? healthcare that we obtain as a consumer good? healthcare that puts more responsibility on us as individuals?

Responsibility challenges linked to these technologies Pressures from policy makers Pressures from commercial providers How far should more freedom to choose mean more responsibility?

Consumer-choice challenges linked to these technologies How can we judge the quality of information and services offered to us directly via the internet? How should the public health care system deal with pressures resulting from new forms of medical profiling and online medicine? Are there some choices that simply shouldn’t be available?

Intervention Government intervention is justified if it is feasible and if potential harm is serious If all else is equal, prefer general to specific interventions If all else is equal, prefer non-coercive to coercive interventions