Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Bruce Dowbiggin

iPhone Now Collects Your Mental Health Data

Published

13 minute read

From the Brownstone Institute

By Robert MaloneRobert Malone 

No data is 100% secure, and this is mental health data. Data that might be extremely embarrassing, career-damaging, or has the potential to disrupt family relationships. Remember, no one knows what new laws, regulations, or more might come to pass years from now.

True Story: The Health app built into iPhones is now collecting as much personal information on the mental health of each and every one of us as they can get a hold of.

Yet, a search on Google and Brave yielded no results on the dangers of sharing such information over the phone or the internet. Seriously, no single MSM has done an article on why such data sharing might be a bad idea?

To start, in sharing such data, you aren’t just sharing your information; iPhone knows exactly who your family members are. In many cases, those phones are connected via family plans.

iPhone mental health assessments not only ask questions about your mental health but can also infer the mental health status of family members, as demonstrated by the image publicly shared by phone on the benefits of a phone mental health assessment.

What could possibly go wrong?

Although the iPhone has historically been known to keep user data “safe,” this is not a given, and there have been hacks and data breaches over the years.

CrowdStrike happened – from just a simple coding error. In 2015, all of my confidential data given to the DoD and the FBI in order to get a security clearance was harvested by the Chinese government, when they hacked into the government’s “super-secret,” and “super-secure” government data storage site. In response, the government offered me a credit report and monitoring of my credit score for a year. Yeah – thanks.

The bottom line – no data is 100% secure, and this is mental health data. Data that might be extremely embarrassing, career-damaging, or has the potential to disrupt family relationships. Remember, no one knows what new laws, regulations, or more might come to pass years from now. This type of information should not be harvested and stored.

Stay Informed with Brownstone Institute. Sign up for updates.

Furthermore, trusting that Apple will never sell that data or pass it off to research groups is very naive. In fact, mental health data is already being mined.

Apple has partnered with various health organizations and academic institutions to conduct health-related studies, such as Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and the University of Michigan on various health studies. Apple also collaborates with the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) on a Digital Mental Health Study. This study likely utilizes data collected through Apple devices to investigate mental health patterns and outcomes. Trusting that the user identifiers have been completely stripped before that data is passed on is a risk that one takes when entering such information into an iPhone.

“Connect with resources.”

So how does Apple benefit? At this time, it appears that Apple is selling advertising of various mental health services by “connecting” services to people’s phones. Apple writes that “These assessments can help users determine their risk level, connect to resources available in their region, and create a PDF to share with their doctor.”

That might mean that if one presses the depressed button in the mental health assessment, Apple will place ads on the search engine for anti-depressants or physicians that prescribe them.

Why would that example be relevant, and which pharmaceutical companies might benefit?

iPhone has developed their mental health assessment with an “educational grant” from Pfizer!

Pfizer manufactures and sells Zoloft, Effexor, Pristiq, and Sinequan formulations. Together the sales revenue for these drugs is in the billions each year:

From 2015 to 2018, 13.2% of American adults reported taking antidepressant medication within the past 30 days, with sertraline (Zoloft) being one of the most common. Even off-patent, there were 39.2 million prescriptions filled with an annual sales revenue of 470 million.

Effexor XR is an antidepressant medication that was originally developed by Wyeth (now part of Pfizer). In 2010, when the first generic version of Effexor XR was introduced in the United States, the brand name product had annual sales of approximately $2.75 billion. By 2013, due to generic competition, Pfizer’s sales of Effexor XR dropped to $440 million.

According to IMS Health data, in 2016, Pristiq (desvenlafaxine) had annual sales of approximately $883 million in the United States, although sales appear to have fluctuated over the years.

The bottom line is that Pfizer is not supplying educational grants to develop mental health assessment software for Apple out of the “goodness of their heart.” Mental health inventions via medication are a big business, and these companies are looking to profit.

This is just one way that Apple is using surveillance capitalism by data mining mental health status and then selling access to that data to Big Pharma, Big Tech, physician and insurance companies, etc.

How this information, which once released or leaked, can never be returned with privacies intact, will be used in the future is unknown.

If the setting for sharing research on health conditions has not been deactivated, this information will go into a database somewhere. It is only Apple’s assurance that your identification has been stripped from the data. Further, your mental health information will be uploaded to the cloud and will be used as a behavioral future. To be shared, packaged, sold, used to influence your decision-making, etc.

I am wary of the highly profitable industry that has been built up around “mental disorders.” Over the years, the American Psychiatric Association and the fields of psychology and psychiatry have hurt individuals and families by both classifying diseases and disorders incorrectly and by developing treatments and therapies that were and are dangerous. Many are still in use. Here are a few examples:

  • There are estimates that 50,000 lobotomies were performed in the United States, with most occurring between 1949 and 1952. In 1949, the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded to António Egas Moniz for his development of the lobotomy procedure.
  • Homosexuality was classified as a mental disorder in 1952 with the publication of the first Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-I) by the American Psychiatric Association (APA). It was listed under “sociopathic personality disturbance.” This classification remained in place until 1973.
  • Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) are a widely prescribed class of antidepressant medications. There is a link between SSRIs and increased risk of violent crime convictions, and other research has shown an increase in self-harm and aggression in children and adolescents taking SSRIs.
  • The APA supports access to affirming and supportive treatment for “transgendered” children, including mental health services, puberty suppression and medical transition support.
  • The APA believes that gender identity develops in early childhood, and some children may not identify with their assigned sex at birth.
  • Asperger’s syndrome was merged into the broader category of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in the DSM-5 in 2013. Since then, a large number of people have faced discrimination and barriers to entry into higher-paying positions. Children handed such a diagnosis also can suffer a lack of confidence in their ability to manage relationships effectively, which can easily carry on to adulthood.

These are just a few of the many, many ways the American Psychiatric Association and the fields of psychology and psychiatry have gotten things very wrong.

  • A survey of more than 500 social and personality psychologists published in 2012 found that only 6 percent identified as conservative overall, implying that 94% were liberal or moderate.
  • At a 2011 Society for Personality and Social Psychology annual meeting, when attendees were asked to identify their political views, only three hands out of about a thousand went up for “conservative” or on the right.

The liberal bias in psychology influences findings on conservative behaviors.

To bring this back to the use of software applications and the iPhone mental health app in particular, be aware that these software programs are being developed by people with a liberal bias and who will view the beliefs of conservatives negatively. What this means for future use of this data is unknown, but it can’t be good.

If you do choose to use the mental health applications, which mainstream media has nothing but praise for, be aware – there are alligators in those waters.

But sure that the data sharing mode, particularly giving data access to researchers is turned off. But even then, don’t be surprised if your phone begins planting messages about the benefits, SSRIs, or other anti-depressant drugs into your everyday searches. Or maybe your alcohol use or tobacco use data will be used to supply you with advertisements on the latest ways to reduce intake or how to find a good mental health facility. These messages may very well include neuro-linguistic programming methods and nudging, to push you into treatment modalities. But honestly, it is all for your “own good and for the benefit of your family.”

Now, the iPhone and the watch can be valuable tools. The EKG, blood oxygen, and heart rate monitoring are fantastic tools for those who suffer from cardiac disorders. I have found them to be extremely helpful.

My wife, Jill is often motivated by getting more walking steps each week via her iWatch tracker.

Just be aware that these programs can be invasive. Data is never 100% secure and it is being used. We just don’t know all the details.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Author

Robert Malone

Robert W. Malone is a physician and biochemist. His work focuses on mRNA technology, pharmaceuticals, and drug repurposing research. You can find him at Substack and Gettr

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Bruce Dowbiggin

With Carney On Horizon This Is No Time For Poilievre To Soften His Message

Published on

Canada awaits the outcome of Canada/ USA Hockey Armageddon II it’s fair to assess just how much a single hockey game has sharpened the focus on the political line brawl between the the nations. The proxies on skates have revealed a few truths about contemporary Canada.

While the Liberal party has suspended reality so that it can pretty-up Mark Carney, Canada’s media instead fawns over conflicting polls showing a Kamala Harris-like ascension of Carney to contender status. Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s Canadian rhetoric gets more belligerent as his 30-day tariff reprieve runs out. Finally, Canadian businessman Kevin O’Leary has advised Trump to delay the tariff Apocalypse till Canada can get an election done.

The common denominator in all this is Conservative leader Pierre Polievre. Or, at least, the mystery of Pierre Poliievre. There are several Poilievres in circulation. There is the Liberal/ NDP version of a nasty wolverine who savages innocent reporters and talks down his nose to opponents.; Next, there is the sunset media’s version of an untested slogan-reciting automaton.

And finally there is the Paul Ryan nerd clone who thrives on explaining kitchen-table economics to people awash in debt and despairing of ever getting ahead in DEI land. Which is the real deal? And does Poilievre himself know who he is anymore?

This distinction is important because, barring a charisma implant for Mark Carney, Poilievre will be the next prime minister, likely with a healthy majority. Neither of the first two Poilievre constructs will disappear soon, of course. The comms teams on the Left are determined to ride over Poilievre, however bad the polls. You need only look at the how the vanquished Left in the U.S. still acts as if they, not Trump, won a mandate last November to understand that Liberals are loath to accept any public rebuke.

The best place to answer the question of who is PP does not come from his apple-eating defenestration of the hapless reporter in B.C. While the MAGA right worshipped that moment and other slap-downs of the press— and the Left demonized him for it— it seems that the Poliievre being groomed by his advisors is meant to be softer and more statesmanlike.

His Saturday rally in Ottawa, shortly before the Canada/ USA hockey brawl, was a good place to start. In the face of Trump’s imminent tariff threat gone was the pitiless street fighter and in came the statesman, full of talk about the glories of Canada and why America needs us.

He seemed intent on tying up the Boomer vote with this speech. Oh wait. Boomers still love Liberals and Carney. Why is Poilievre going after that unwinnable demographic? Isn’t that the quicksand every Conservative, save Steven Harper, has floundered in? But there was Poilievre wandering into Liberal Speak, trying to list the benefits of the nation’s past.

Real Canadians– eg those not voting for Carney– know what a great place it can be. They don’t need to be given a Tourism Canada commercial. And as we wrote last week younger Canadians need a reason to reject Trump’s offer of citizenship. Poilievre needed to level with Canadians about what happened the past decade on defence, crime, DEI. He needed to be frank about money laundering, fentanyl production and the penetration of China’s Communists into the fabric of the land.

While his handlers seemingly urged him to go statesman,  Canadians were willing to hear the truth, not another Carney eye glazer. He needed to channel Harry “Give ‘Em Hell” Truman (“I tell my opponents the truth and it feels like hell.” ) He needed to say he’ll be pitiless in his treatment of those (media, PSA) who stand in the way of a bright new day. As so often happens it was CPC playing on Liberals turf instead of staking out their own. Canada already has Doug Ford, they’re saying. We don’t need another mushy Tory.

Poilievre concluded with a Churchill barb about how America will always do the right thing— after they’ve exhausted the other possibilities. It was an unnecessary and provocative one liner from a guy who’s try to establish his bonafides as the capable negotiator for Canada O’Leary is promising he’ll be. Did he and his brain trust think the thin-skinned Trump would simply slough off the jibe?

It is performances like these that leave Canadians wondering if they’re voting for Poilievre or simply voting against Trudeau and the thoroughly corrupt Liberal/ NDP coalition. Wobbly performances like this will lead to vote leakage to Liberals and to Maxime Bernier’s People’s Party of Canada. Bernier has urged a realistic assessment of Canada’s precarious position vis a vis the USA.

Instead of perpetuating the shopworn homilies to 1970s Canada that have expired, Bernier suggests looking at the opportunities of closer economic— not cultural— cooperation with the Americans. Let Liberal/ NDP moan about collaboration. They’re like the three little pigs expecting their houses of straw and twigs will survive the ongoing attacks of China and international money laundering.

Poilievre has to stop pretending that a heavily indebted and structurally crumbling Canada can withstand the next four years of Trump bombast. He must have an intervention with the Canadian public to bring them to the bracing reality they face. Only when they know which side is up, away from Trudeau, will they start to climb out of this mess.

Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster  A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster. His new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed Hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org. You can see all his books at brucedowbigginbooks.ca.

Continue Reading

Bruce Dowbiggin

Team Canada Hits American Wall. Wall Wins. Now What?

Published on

You wanted a border war? You got a border war. And just like the political conflict this one came down to Canada’s defence. Or lack of same.

After weeks of a phoney war of words between Canada’s abdicated leadership and America’s newly elected Trump administration, the question of Canada’s sovereignty crystallized Saturday on a hockey rink in Montreal. It was a night few will forget. The 3-1 score of Team U.S. over Team Canada being secondary to other outcomes.

Despite public calls for mutual respect, the sustained booing of the American national anthem and the Team Canada invocation by MMA legend Georges St. Pierre was answered by the Tkachuck brothers, Matthew and Brady, with a series of fights in the first nine seconds of the game. Three fights to be exact when former Canuck J.T. Miller squared up with Brandon Hagel. (All three U.S.players have either played on or now play for Canadian NHL teams.)

Premeditated and nasty. To say nothing of the vicious mugging of Canada’s legend Sidney Crosby behind the U.S. net moments later by Charlie McEvoy.

Those who’d expected a solidarity moment pregame to counter booing the anthem had been optimistic. “Kinda think it might be more fitting for the US team to go stand shoulder to shoulder with the Canadians, under the circumstances. That, I’d cheer.,” said Andrew Coyne. Wrong again.

Expecting a guys’ weekend like the concurrent NBA All Star game, the fraternal folks instead got a Pier Six brawl. It was the most stunning beginning to a game most could remember in 50 years. (Not least of all the rabid Canadian fanbase urging patriotism in the home of Quebec separation) Considering this Four Nations event was the NHL’s idea to replace the tame midseason All Star Game where players apologize for bumping into each other during a casual skate, the tumult as referees tried to start the game was shocking.

But in unprecedented times who could have predicted the outcome? Under-siege Canadians were represented by fans wearing flashing red lights. They’d been urged on by yahoos in the Canadian media to boo everything American they saw, unaware but uncaring if it ruled out Americans playing in a Canadian city when they get the chance.

“It’s also more political than the (1972) Summit Series was,” bawled Toronto Star columnist Bruce Arthur, “because Canada’s existence wasn’t on the line then, and it may be now. You’re damn right Canadians should boo the anthem.”

He got what he asked for. It was as if large segments of Canada had suddenly awoken to their fate in the weeks since incoming POTUS Donald Trump’s tariff threats forced PM Justin Trudeau to resign and prorogue Parliament so his Liberals could stage a succession plan. Or maybe, according to Liberal house leader Karin Gould, postpone the election.

Instead of looking inward to examine what Canada had done to invite trouble the target was instead on Trump, who many believe is supposed to act like a beneficent older brother to Canada. Indignant Canadians are suddenly cancelling winter vacations to the U.S. while boycotting American chain stores like Home Depot and Costco. Even though Canada’s military is a token force following years of Trudeau downsizing and DEI incursions, the sunset media invokes Vimy Ridge and D-Day in their disgust with Trump, who wants Canada (and NATO allies) to actually pay for their defence.

Earlier in the day, presumptive PM Pierre Poilievre echoed the Liberal line with a rally for Canadian unity that would have worked in 1995, not 2025. In a move he may regret he quoted Churchill’s barb that Americans will always do the right thing after every other option has been exhausted. It drew cheap laughs. With luck, Trump’s animus to Trudeau will overshadow this potshot in a critical moment. Or maybe not.

The TV commercials from Canada’s corporate side waved the patriot flag, too. Leading one to wonder had they really missed the Trudeau decade that prompted this? Did they not hear him talking about Canada having no culture now? How it was now postmodern? How it was now 40 million narratives? How he’d lowered the flag for six months in penance for racism and genocide? Apparently not, as they revived narratives from the 1980 Quebec referendum to stir the crowd.

Now, with the symbolic game lost, what’s next? For Team Canada, injured and humbled, there’s an afternoon tilt Monday in Boston against Finland. Only by beating the Finns can they get a revenge game against the American, this time before a hostile Boston crowd. Should they get there would it be Hudson Bay rules again? How will Americans respond? The mind boggles.

Had there not been such a dramatic political overtone, the attention of the media might have dwelt on the fact that this was the first Canada/ U.S. best-on-best contest in 12 years. Excluding the fights it was a monumental display of skill, stamina and, sadly for Canada, goaltending. Why the wait? NHL commissioner Gary Bettman always puts the league’s interests ahead of those who want to see the best players against each other. So expansion and outdoor games took precedence.

Ordinarily the smashing success of the tournament would shame the NHL into more such competitions. And indeed they are conceding to a schedule of Olympics (Italy in 2026) and World Cups in the next decade. As thrilling as any of those contests might be they will likely pale next to Saturday’s drama. In fact, only Game Eight of the 1972 Summit Series can match the explosive political and sports combination of Feb. 16, 2025.

Guesses are now being accepted over just what Canada and Canada’s hockey team’s program might look like by the end of the 2020’s. Once certainty— if the game Saturday is any indication fraternal friendship between the U.S. and Canada will be on hold for a while.

Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster  A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster. His new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed Hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org. You can see all his books at brucedowbigginbooks.ca.

Continue Reading

Trending

X