iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 04/09/2026

Clearly, being an expert in ethics does not make you a practitioner.

1121

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

Some of the other arguments against are equally compelling

010

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/08/2026

This argument, against a council proposal to build housing on a city centre car park, made me smile.

110

Reposted by Charles Tallack

Amy Borrett @amyborrett.ft.com · 03/08/2026

NHS England will change how it evaluates the success of the controversial Palantir platform after staff raised concerns about the methods, more than a year after the claims were first published, according to emails obtained by @financialtimes.com via FOI as.ft.com/r/453430e1-c...

as.ft.com

NHS England to revise Palantir platform data after staff concerns

Changes to two most widely cited claims come as scrutiny grows over US tech company’s contract

171

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

The Health Foundation's analysis is here. www.health.org.uk/media-office...

030

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

It doesn't follow from this that the FDP doesn't work. The main aim of the FDP is to facilitate access to linked data. Whether improved access to data leads to better decisions and patient outcomes is dependent on many additional factors (eg in the case of delayed discharges, social care capacity).

110

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

We already knew that NHSE and Palantir's claims were based on a methodologically flawed approach (it wasn't causal; the OSR's review had taken NHSE to task on this). This new analysis shows that when the claims are examined using a more robust approach, they evaporate.

100

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

The Health Foundation analysis also finds that OPTICA adoption did not noticeably change the delayed discharge performance trend after adoption. This is from the Health Foundation's letter to the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR), which has been reviewing NHSE's claims 👇

100

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

Now the Health Foundation have published the analysis that NHS England should have done. They compared Trusts which had adopted OPTICA to those which hadn't (red and blue lines in screenshot below), finding no noticeable difference between them.

110

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

NHS England, Palantir and its cheerleaders claim that the OPTICA tool cut discharge delays by 15%. But this was based on a before-and-after comparison. NHSE recently conceded that their study was not causal but have continued to attribute impact to the tool.

100

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

Yesterday, the Health Foundation published analysis finding no evidence that the Palantir/FDP tool OPTICA, has cut discharge delays, further undermining NHS England claims that it had. bsky.app/profile/dian...

198

Reposted by Charles Tallack

Chris Dillow @chrisdillow.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

If this had been policy in the 70s (as it partly was), towns would have produced lots of mining engineers & metallurgists just before pits & steelworks closed. As the yanks say, you should skate to where the puck's going, not to where it is. www.theguardian.com/politics/202...

theguardian.com

Burnham to tell schools in England to adapt teaching to local business needs

PM wants curriculums for students aged 14 and above to be more responsive to local jobs market

1023683

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

But it doesn't follow from this that the Palantir system isn't making a difference. Its aim is to facilitate access to linked data. In some hospitals it might do that. But whether improved access to data leads to fewer delays in hospital depends on other factors eg social care capacity.

010

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

We already knew NHSE and Palantir's claims were based on a methodologically flawed approach. This new analysis shows that when the claims are examined using a more robust approach, they evaporate.

120

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 28/07/2026

The Health Foundation study, which the FT reported on, is here. It includes this chart, showing the difference in delayed discharges between trusts using/not using OPTICA, the product Palantir and NHS England claim reduces delays by 15%. www.health.org.uk/sites/defaul...

120

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

With Wes Streeting as health secretary, the NHS achieved a key March 2026 target (though other targets, not of course mentioned, were missed). But when he stepped down, the NHS did not appear be to on course to achieve the longer term goal of returning waiting times to a maximum of 18 weeks.

211

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

To achieve the 18 week pledge the waiting list needs to fall to around 4.5m cases - a reduction of almost a million cases a year. Between May 25 & May 26 it fell by a paltry 78k - less than the 246k in the prior year. The reduction is slowing down rather than speeding up, as it needs to.

100

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

What does this mean for the prospects of achieving the govt's pledge that by March 2029, 92% of waiting list cases will be within 18 weeks?

100

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

It looks like the large reductions we saw in the last quarter of 2025/26 aren't sustainable. Extra money boosted activity and Trusts pulled out all the stops to meet the end of March target (65% of cases within 18 weeks).

100

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

Between Feb 26 and March 26 the waiting list fell by 110k - a record monthly drop. But the most recent data for March to May (when Streeting was still at health) shows this record-breaking reduction has been more than reversed. The waiting list rose by 112k in April and another 60k in May.

122

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 22/07/2026

In his first speech as defence secretary, Wes Streeting reiterates his record at health in "achieving the biggest reduction in waiting in 17 years". Is that record still looking as good?

123

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 21/07/2026

Yes, it's not targeted but we can't understand the distributional consequences until we know how it's funded. For example, if it were funded by tax increases for the better off, the net effect would be progressive

020

Reposted by Charles Tallack

David Higham @oldtrotter.bsky.social · 15/04/2026

Excellent piece on how inequality manifests itself in ways that aren’t measured by official statistics. Economics does itself a profound disservice when it neglects imbalances in power.

Which gets us to the crux. It's plausible that these inequalities of power have contributed to (pdf) economic stagnation. Bankers' power to extract implicit subsidies and to avoid tight regulation contributed to the financial crisis. Billionaires' control of the media tipped the balance towards Brexit, and prevents intelligent and meaningful analysis of policy not least by keeping some issues off the agenda and others on it. The mega-rich invest resources that could be spent on new technologies instead in efforts to preserve their wealth, for example by entrenching (pdf). hierarchies or by lobbying for favourable regulation and copyright laws that stifle competition. Weak trades unions and strong management power have encouraged increased exploitation rather than investments in labour-saving technologies. And big corporate hierarchies encourage office politicking; cultivating skills which management can easily assess rather than more useful ones; and incentivize short-termism (pdf) at the expense of healthy corporate cultures.

1166

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 06/04/2026

Predictably inconsistent Daily Mail editorial line (via Private Eye)

020

Reposted by Charles Tallack

Roland Smith @rolandmcs.bsky.social · 05/04/2026

Grok is a bit sh1t.

97310

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 26/03/2026

Rule 2: if your results are surprising and they make you feel good, be doubly cautious.

121

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 26/03/2026

Rule 1 for analytical quality assurance: if your results are surprising, they're probably wrong. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

142

Reposted by Charles Tallack

Ramin Nasibov @nasibov.me · 12/03/2026

Another day, another stupid Excel chart.

142091458

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 12/03/2026

We know about the three planned NHS shifts. But there appears to be an unintended fourth one: mental health to physical health - seemingly caused by the second shift, analogue to digital.

020

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 11/03/2026

What a confusing sentence! “I can’t guarantee that I’ve never been on a march where someone hasn’t said something I disagree with”

000

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 10/03/2026

As also shown by the government's own figures... bsky.app/profile/char...

001

Reposted by Charles Tallack

Jo Bibby @jobibby.bsky.social · 20/02/2026

✨✨✨New blog What would it take for the government to fulfil its promise to halve the gap in healthy life expectancy across the country? TLDR: improving health care won’t be enough on its own, govt urgently needs to reduce deprivation. Full analysis here ⬇️⬇️ www.health.org.uk/features-and...

health.org.uk

096

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 19/02/2026

A puzzling BBC headline yesterday, following publication of the ONS inflation estimates. Bread and cereals together account for only 1.8% of the CPI basket. Their price dropped by 2% between Dec and Jan, but the contribution to the fall in inflation is surely minimal?

010

Reposted by Charles Tallack

Georgia Banjo @georgiabanjo.bsky.social · 06/02/2026

Great analysis. It was also clear from the beginning it wouldn't work. Guy's and St Thomas's was the model for all this, but after starting the programme the trust's wait times fell slower than the national average and the theatre staff went on strike...

052

Reposted by Charles Tallack

Dean Hochlaf @dhochlaf.bsky.social · 06/02/2026

Excellent thread as the Health Foundation adds further evidence the government are not being entirely transparent with claims of reduced waiting lists Fixing the NHS requires an honest appraisal of the challenges so we can allocate resources appropriately. The gov really needs to do better

221

Reposted by Charles Tallack

Mary Dixon-Woods @marydixonwoods.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

This is really fascinating. Reads like a detective story, offers striking insights into the numbers on waiting lists.

042

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

Thanks to @jamesillman.bsky.social at @hsj.co.uk for covering our analysis (£) www.hsj.co.uk/quality-and-...

hsj.co.uk

020

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

Our full analysis is here: www.health.org.uk/features-and...

health.org.uk

130

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

NHSE’s evaluation of the programme didn’t address this question. It focused on the programme's impact (good for press releases) but not the equally important question of how the impact was achieved (useful for learning/wider spread).

150

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

All of this raises the question of how the programme worked. On the face of it (comparing FF20 to other trusts), not by increasing throughput as intended but, instead, by increasing the removal of untreated patients from the waiting list, and reducing (unnecessary?) referrals.

240

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

Completed pathways grew by 0.3% in the FF20 trusts, compared to 3.7% elsewhere (12 times slower.) Total removals from the waiting list did grow slightly faster because “unreported removals” (cases that shouldn’t be on the waiting list being taken off) grew much more quickly.

130

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

So far, so good. But how the programme worked is not at all clear. It aimed to reduce waiting lists by speeding up hospital processes so surgeons could do more. If this happened we’d expect to see completed pathways (people treated from the waiting list) growing more quickly. But we don’t…

131

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

The difference is unlikely to have arisen by chance: there’s a 1 in 20 chance that a random selection of trusts would give the same results or better. We can’t, however, tell to how much of the difference is down to the characteristics of the 20 areas, and how much down to the FF20 programme.

130

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

We found that in the year from Oct 24 to Oct 25 waiting lists in the FF20 (crack team) trusts fell by 5.7% compared to a fall of 1.3% elsewhere. This supports the headline claim.

240

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 05/02/2026

On 14 January Wes Streeting said that waiting lists had fallen three times faster in 20 areas of the country where crack teams had been deployed. We’ve looked at this claim and have questions. 🧵 www.gov.uk/government/n...

gov.uk

Waiting lists cut 3 times faster in highest joblessness areas

Waiting lists in 20 areas in England fall 3 times faster than the national average thanks to experts deployed by government to help supercharge NHS care.

12314

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 19/01/2026

It's an odd document. Usually you'd have an impact assessment with policy objectives, options and their costs and impacts - aligning with policy choices. But the Impact Statement seems like it was produced retrospectively, justifying (not always very convincingly) the 10YHP policy choices.

021

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 19/01/2026

The 10YHP made the bold, false & easily refutable claim that there's unequivocal evidence that shifting care to the community is cheaper. The Impact Statement says their literature review found mixed impacts on costs. Suggesting the literature review was undertaken after the 10YHP was finalised?

021

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 17/01/2026

What explains the divergence between consumer confidence of the over- and under-50s? @faisalislam.bsky.social for BBC www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

6177

Reposted by Charles Tallack

Stuart Hoddinott @stuarthoddinott.bsky.social · 15/01/2026

DHSC published its impact statement for the 10 Year Health Plan this week (yes, that is 6 months after it published the plan) It's more measured and clear-eyed than the original document and quite a contrast to some of the effusive optimism in the plan Some of the things that caught my eye 👇

22621

Charles Tallack @charlestallack.bsky.social · 06/01/2026

Footnote: it's not immediately obvious where the government's estimates come from but the 2 calories a day reduction is consistent with the previous government's assessment of the impact of advertising bans (option F). assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60d352...

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk

020