The European Union implemented data privacy laws in mid-2018 and the state of California enacted a similar law several weeks later. These regulations affect medical data collection and analysis. It is unclear if they achieve this goal in the realm of clinical trials. Here we investigate the effect of these laws on clinical trials through analysis of clinical trials recorded on the US's ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and scientific papers describing clinical trials. Our findings show that the number of phase 1 and 2 trials in countries not adhering to these data privacy laws rose significantly after implementation of these laws. The largest rise occurred in countries which are less free, as indicated by the negative correlation (−0.48, p = 0.008) between the civil liberties freedom score of countries and the increase in the number of trials. This trend was not observed in countries adhering to data privacy laws nor in the paper publication record. The rise was larger (and statistically significant) among industry funded trials and interventional trials. Thus, the implementation of data privacy laws is associated a change in the location of clinical trials, which are currently executed more often in countries where people have fewer protections for their data.

In September 2024, the Irish Data Protection Commission fined Meta Ireland 91 million euros after passwords of social media users were stored in 'plaintext' on Meta's internal systems rather than with cryptographic protection or encryption. In May 2023, the EU fined Meta 1.2 billion euros for violating laws on digital privacy and putting the data of EU citizens at risk through Facebook's EU-U.S. data transfers. European privacy legislation is seen as being far stricter than American privacy law, and the sending of EU citizens’ data to the United States resulted in the record breaking penalty being issued to the tech giant. In January 2023, after it was discovered that Meta Platforms had improperly required that users of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp accept personalized adverts to use the platforms, the company was issued a 390 million euro fine by the European Commission. EU regulators claim that the social media giant broke the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) by including the demand in its terms of service. In addition, Meta was fined 405 million euros by the Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) in September 2022 for violating Instagram's children's privacy settings. In November 2022, the DPC fined Meta a further 265 million euros for failing to protect their users from data scraping. GDPR violations in 2022 Social media sites and companies are not the only types of online services upon which users' data can potentially be compromised. In 2022, the online service with the biggest fine for violating GDPR was e-commerce and digital powerhouse Amazon, which was issued a 746 million euro fine. Furthermore, in December 2021, Google was penalized 90 million euros for GDPR violations. What are the most common GDPR violations? Since GDPR went into effect in May 2018, fines have been imposed for a variety of reasons. As of June 2022, companies' non-compliance with general data processing principles accounted for the largest share of fines, resulting in over 845 million euros worth of penalties. Insufficient legal basis for data processing was the second most common violation, amounting to 447 million euros in fines.

This file contains data on 34 attempts to pass environmental protection laws in the United States Congress between 1969 and 2018. It focuses on the the level of uncertainty concerning proposals. Three types of uncertainty are detailed: urgency, political safety, and policy effectiveness.

As of February 2025, the industry sector seeing the largest fines issued for General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) violations, was media, telecoms and broadcasting. The industry has seen approximately four billion euros in fines, in total, since the enforcement of the law in 2018.

The GDPR Compliance Solutions market has rapidly evolved since the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) came into effect in May 2018, fundamentally reshaping how organizations handle personal data. As businesses across various sectors strive to comply with stringent data protection laws, the demand for GDPR com

Energy Performance Data for Non-domestic Buildings:This dataset presents data from every valid non-domestic EPC assessment held by the Scottish EPC Register (SEPCR) from commencement of central lodgement of the current EPC format to the SEPCR in October 2014 to September 2024. The data was extracted from the register on 25 October 2024.The data is published as a single file. Historic records (where a newer assessment of a building is lodged) and records lodged but subsequently marked ‘not for issue’ (usually due to an error in lodged data) are not reported. The data published in this extract is made available as Environmental Information for data analysis and to enable research into energy efficiency issues. The data must not be relied upon to verify if a valid EPC exists for a building, nor as the basis for the provision of energy improvement advice for a building. To check for compliance with regulatory requirements, a search for a valid EPC for a building should be undertaken at the Scottish Energy Performance Certificate Register. Please note that this data is not personal data in its published form. Persons accessing this dataset should be aware that if processing falls within the scope of the United Kingdom General Data Protection Regulation, or The Data Protection Act 2018, they will become a data controller and must comply with the data protection legislation. In line with the Scottish Government's Open Data Strategy, this data is published in a three-star format (data which is made available online, in an open and machine-readable format – see below for copyright information).

description:

1995-2018. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System. Legislation Preemption. The STATE System houses current and historical state-level legislative data on tobacco use prevention and control policies. Data are reported on a quarterly basis. Data include information related to summary state preemption of more stringent local laws on advertising, smokefree indoor air, youth access and licensure.

1995-2018. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System. Legislation Preemption. The STATE System houses current and historical state-level legislative data on tobacco use prevention and control policies. Data are reported on a quarterly basis. Data include information related to summary state preemption of more stringent local laws on advertising, smokefree indoor air, youth access and licensure.

In an effort to increase transparency and to facilitate access to information on substances in commerce in Canada, the Government of Canada is publishing a summary of the information received in response to the Notice to provide information for the risk management of 1,4-benzenediamine, N,N′-mixed phenyl and tolyl derivatives (BENPAT). The notice was published on August 25, 2018 in the Canada Gazette, Part I: Vol. 152, No. 34, pursuant to paragraph 71(1)(b) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA). Information gathered under the notice will be considered to determine whether to control, or the manner in which to control the risks posed by the substance. This summary offers an overview of the information gathered under the initiative and includes general information on what was received from persons subject to the notice, including: number and type of submissions; activities (manufacture, import, use to manufacture); industry classification; substance functions; and commercial uses. The final screening assessment report for BENPAT can be found on the Chemical substances in Batch 11 of the Challenge webpage To complement this summary, data compilation tables, containing additional details on the non-confidential information received, are available for download in Microsoft Excel and comma-separated value (CSV) format. Important information about this summary: In order to protect confidential business information (CBI), quantity ranges and exclusion of qualitative data have been applied in some cases. Qualitative data includes information that characterizes and categorizes information [e.g. company names, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, specified uses, Substance Function Codes, and Consumer and Commercial Codes]. The dataset does not include CBI, consequently, the figures presented may be an underestimate. Code 999 "Other" was provided for a Substance Function Code or a Consumer and Commercial Code, it indicates that the codes listed in the notice did not apply and a description was required. Please refer to the notice for the full list of codes and their descriptions. Supplemental Information Useful links: http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2018/2018-08-25/html/notice-avis-eng.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/challenge/batch-11.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/challenge/batch-11/benpat.html

Analysis of ‘Amendment of the cantonal constitution — Adaptation to adult protection law ’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from http://data.europa.eu/88u/dataset/vote-anderung-der-kantonsverfassung-anpassung-an-das-erwachsenenschutzrecht-staatskanzlei-zug on 18 January 2022.

--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---

Final results of the cantonal vote “Amendment of the Cantonal Constitution — Adaptation to Adult Protection Law”, 10 June 2018, Canton Zug, broken down by municipalities.

--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---

In an effort to increase transparency and to facilitate access to information on substances in commerce in Canada, the Government of Canada is publishing a summary of the information received in response to the Notice to provide information for the risk management of certain coal tars and their distillates. The notice was published on December 1, 2018 in the Canada Gazette, Part I, Vol. 152, No. 48, pursuant to paragraph 71(1)(b) of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA). Information gathered under the notice will be considered to determine whether to control, or the manner in which to control the risks posed by the substance. This summary offers an overview of the information gathered under the initiative and includes general information on what was received from persons subject to the notice, including: number and type of submissions; substances reported; activities (manufacture, import, use to manufacture); quantities; industry classification; and applications. The draft screening assessment report on certain coal tars and their distillates can be found on the Stream 0 substances in the Petroleum Sector Stream Approach webpage. To complement this summary, data compilation tables, containing additional details on the non-confidential information received, are available for download in Microsoft Excel and comma-separated value (CSV) format. Important information about this summary: In order to protect confidential business information (CBI), quantity ranges and exclusion of qualitative data elements have been applied in some cases. Qualitative data includes information that characterizes and categorizes information [e.g. company names, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, specified uses, and Application codes]. The dataset does not include CBI, consequently, the figures presented may be an underestimate. Code C999 "Other" was provided for an Application code, it indicates that the codes listed in the notice did not apply and a description was required. Please refer to the notice for the full list of codes and their corresponding descriptions. Supplemental Information Useful links: https://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2018/2018-12-01/html/notice-avis-eng.html https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/evaluating-existing-substances/coal-tars-guidance-summary.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/petroleum-sector-stream-approach/stream-0.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/petroleum-sector-stream-approach/stream-0/coal-tars-distillates.html

1995-2018. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System. Legislation – Smokefree Indoor Air. The STATE System houses current and historical state-level legislative data on tobacco use prevention and control policies. Data are reported on a quarterly basis. Data include information related to state legislation on comprehensive smokefree indoor air in private worksites, restaurants, and bars.

The Consumer Product Safety Program (CPSP) of Health Canada administers and enforces the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act (CCPSA) and its regulations by conducting investigations, inspections, seizures and prosecutions. The CPSP also responds to reports of consumer product-related health or safety concerns from industry and consumers.

Business rate properties, liable parties and rate relief - this list includes all business properties, with the property description and rateable value, it identifies those receiving rate relief, whether the property is occupied or vacant, and liability start date.

The datasets represent a snapshot in time and will be updated half yearly.

The data has been redacted to comply with the Data Protection Act 2018.

1995-2018. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) System. Legislation – Smokefree Indoor Air. The STATE System houses current and historical state-level legislative data on tobacco use prevention and control policies. Data are reported on a quarterly basis. Data include information related to state legislation on comprehensive smokefree indoor air in private worksites, restaurants, and bars.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed. This study includes data that was used to investigate the effect of legislative and judicial factors on system responses to sex trafficking of minors (STM) in metropolitan and non-metropolitan communities. To accomplish this, researchers evaluated the effectiveness of the immunity, protection, and rehabilitative elements of a state safe harbor law. This project was undertaken as a response to a growing push to pass state safe harbor laws to align governmental and community responses to the reframing of the issue of sex trafficking of minors that was ushered in with the passage of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). This collection includes 4 SPSS files, 3 Excel data files, and 2 SPSS Syntax files: Child-Welfare-Human-Trafficking-Reports-2013-2017-data.xlsx Judicial-Interview-De-identified-Quantitative-Data-for-NACJD_REV_Oct2018.sav (n=82; 36 variables) Judicial-online-survey-data-for-NACJD_REV_Dec2018.sav (n=55; 77 variables) Juvenile-Justice-Screening-for-HT-2015-MU-MU-0009.xlsx Post-implementation-survey-data-for-NACJD_REV_Dec2018.sav (n=365; 1029 variables) Pre-implementation-survey-data-for-NACJD_REV_Dec2018.sav (n=323; 159 variables) Recode-syntax-for-pre-implementation-survey-for-NACJD.sps Statewide-juvenile-court-charges-2015-MU-MU-0009-to-NACJD.xlsx Syntax-for-post-implementation-survey-data-to-NACJD.sps Qualitative data from judicial interviews and agency open-ended responses to Post-Implementation of the Safe Harbor Law Survey are not available as part of this collection.

The State Data Plan is required to be developed in accordance with Public Act 18-175 . Specifically the Act requires that the state data plan shall: Purpose of the plan: establish management and data analysis standards across all executive branch agencies, include specific, achievable goals within the two years following adoption of such plan, as well as longer term goals, make recommendations to enhance standardization and integration of data systems and data management practices across all executive branch agencies, provide a timeline for a review of any state or federal legal concerns or other obstacles to the internal sharing of data among agencies, including security and privacy concerns, and set goals for improving the open data repository. An initial draft of the plan is due on or before November 1, 2018 with a final plan due December 31, 2018. The plan is required to be updated every two years thereafter. Once final, information technology actions of affected state agencies are required to be consistent with the plan. Further, the Chief Data Officer is required to establish procedures for each affected agency to reports on the agency’s progress toward achieving the goals articulated in the plan. Feedback on the Phase 1 Draft is welcome and will be accepted until August 24. About the Process The plan will be developed iteratively, in phases, each with an opportunity for both public and agency input. Phase 1: Release and feedback on a broad set of principles and goals to guide the development of the plan and establish a vision for improving the management, use, and sharing of data for state agencies. Additionally, this phase includes several “Focal Points” or areas where the state should focus its efforts for the initial 2 year period that the plan will cover. Phase 2: Finalize state data plan principles and add more specific actions under each principle that will assist in guiding agency actions. Finalize the overarching goals and supplement with more specific measurable objectives that will advance each goal. Finalize “Focal Points” and supplement with additional steps to help advance implementation. Collect feedback from both the public and state agencies. Phase 3: Present a draft of the state data plan for review and feedback from the Data Analysis Technology Advisory board established pursuant to Public Act 18-175

This publication contains the official statistics about uses of the Mental Health Act(1) ('the Act') in England during 2018-19. Under the Act, people with a mental disorder may be formally detained in hospital (or 'sectioned') in the interests of their own health or safety, or for the protection of other people. They can also be treated in the community but subject to recall to hospital for assessment and/or treatment under a Community Treatment Order (CTO). In 2016-17, the way we source and produce these statistics changed. Previously these statistics were produced from the KP90 aggregate data collection. They are now primarily produced from the Mental Health Services Data Set (MHSDS). The MHSDS provides a much richer data source for these statistics, allowing for new insights into uses of the Act. However, some providers that make use of the Act are not yet submitting data to the MHSDS, or submitting incomplete data. Improvements in data quality have been made over the past year. NHS Digital is working with partners to ensure that all providers are submitting complete data and this publication includes guidance on interpreting these statistics. Footnotes (1) The Mental Health Act 1983 as amended by the Mental Health Act 2007 and other legislation.

Please provide the following 1. The number of Vaccine Damage Payments made in each year starting from 2018 to the current year. 2. Please break down the figures by year. 3. Please provide the monetary value of each of those payments. 4. Please provide a brief medical explanation for each payment detailing why the payment was made 5. Please explain how the 60% disability threshold was decided and by whom 6. Please provide what is classed as a 60% disability? Your request was received on 6 July, and I am dealing with it under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Response All data as of 11 July 2023. The NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) took over administration of the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS) from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) on 1 November 2021. All data relating to claims submitted prior to 1 November 2021 was transferred to us from DWP. Please be aware that I have decided not to release the full details where the total number of patients falls below five. This is because the patients could be identified, when combined with other information that may be in the public domain or reasonably available. This information falls under the exemption in section 40 subsections 2 and 3 (a) of the Freedom of Information Act. This is because it would breach the first data protection principle as: a) it is not fair to disclose patients’ personal details to the world and is likely to cause damage or distress. b) these details are not of sufficient interest to the public to warrant an intrusion into the privacy of the patients. Questions 1,2 and 3: 2018: Fewer than five claimants received a Vaccine Damage Payment. Claimants received payments between £100,000 and £120,000. 2019: Fewer than five claimants received a Vaccine Damage Payment. Claimants received payments between £100,000 and £120,000. 2020: Fewer than five claimants received a Vaccine Damage Payment. Claimants received payments between £100,000 and £120,000. 2021: Fewer than five claimants received a Vaccine Damage Payment. Claimants received payments between £100,000 and £120,000. 2022: 33 claimants were notified that they were entitled to a Vaccine Damage Payment of £120,000. Of those, 26 received their payment in 2022. Payment is made to each claimant within 10 working days of supplying us with their bank details. 2023: As of 11 July 2023, 94 claimants have been notified that are entitled to a Vaccine Damage Payment of £120,000. Of those, 78 have received their payment so far. Payment is made to each claimant within 10 working days of supplying us with their bank details. Question 4, 5 and 6 Under the policy of the scheme, payments are made when it can be established, on the balance of probabilities, that the disablement was caused by a vaccine covered by the VDPS, and that the resulting disablement is severe (60% or more). Severely disabled means at least 60% disabled, assessed for the purposes of section 103 of The Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992. Further principles for assessing the extent of disablement are set out in the Social Security (General Benefit) Regulations 1982 (legislation.gov.uk). The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) is responsible for the policy and legislation that governs the VDPS.

The Portugal cybersecurity market, currently experiencing robust growth, is projected to reach a significant size driven by increasing digitalization and the rising frequency of cyber threats targeting businesses and individuals alike. The 7.70% CAGR (2019-2033) indicates a sustained upward trajectory, fueled by several key factors. The expanding adoption of cloud computing, coupled with stricter data privacy regulations (like GDPR), necessitates robust cybersecurity solutions across various sectors. Furthermore, the increasing sophistication of cyberattacks, including ransomware and phishing campaigns, compels organizations in BFSI, healthcare, manufacturing, and government sectors to invest heavily in proactive security measures. The market is segmented by offering (cloud security, data security, identity access management, and network security dominating), deployment (cloud and on-premise solutions exhibiting strong competition), and end-user (BFSI and government sectors leading the demand). Key players like IBM, Cisco, Dell Technologies, and Fortinet are actively competing for market share, offering a diverse range of products and services. The market's growth is further bolstered by rising awareness of cybersecurity risks and the increasing availability of managed security services. While the overall market demonstrates significant growth potential, some challenges remain. The relatively smaller size of the Portuguese economy compared to larger European markets might limit the overall market volume. However, this also presents opportunities for niche players to establish themselves and cater to specific market needs. The market's future growth hinges on factors like continued government investment in cybersecurity infrastructure, enhanced public awareness, and the successful adoption of advanced security technologies like AI-powered threat detection systems. The consistent rise in cybercrime and its associated costs will also continue to drive demand for sophisticated and proactive security measures, ensuring the sustained expansion of the Portuguese cybersecurity market in the coming years. Recent developments include: NOV 2021 - NightDragon, a dedicated cybersecurity, safety, security, and private investment and advisory firm, announced a new partnership with Exclusive Networks, a trusted cybersecurity specialist for digital infrastructure with a global footprint, to help its portfolio companies succeed in the European market through the Ignition platform. The agreement includes advising them on their channel and distribution strategies in the area and providing them with preferred benefits., AUG 2021 - The long-awaited Decree Law 65/2021 (only available in Portuguese) came into effect on August 9, 2021, regulating the Cyberspace Security Legal Framework (Law 6/2018, only available in Portuguese) and defining cybersecurity certification obligations in the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2019/881 of the European Parliament and the Council.. Key drivers for this market are: Increasing Demand for Digitalization and Scalable IT Infrastructure, Rapidly Increasing Cybersecurity Incidents and Regulations Requiring Their Reporting. Potential restraints include: Increasing Demand for Digitalization and Scalable IT Infrastructure, Rapidly Increasing Cybersecurity Incidents and Regulations Requiring Their Reporting. Notable trends are: Smartphone and Internet Penetration to Drive the Market.

As indicated in the Notice with respect to certain quaternary ammonium compounds in Canadian commerce — Phase 1 (the Notice), and in accordance with section 49 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), the Government of Canada is providing a summary of the information received in response to the Notice, which was published in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on November 17, 2018 under section 46 of CEPA. The Notice collected information from manufacturers and importers (e.g., quantities and uses) on approximately 800 quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs) for the 2017 calendar year. The information will be used to support priority setting, and inform future risk assessments. The files in the resources section below offer an overview of the information gathered under this initiative including: type of submission; reported substances; substances that are manufactured or imported; industrial sectors involved; substance functions and commercial applications; and intended use (in commercial activity, in consumer activity, and by children). It should be noted that these documents do not include an assessment of the potential risks these substances may pose to the environment or to the health of Canadians. To complement the information summary document, a compilation of the non-confidential information received is available for download in Excel and CSV formats and includes a list of the substances for which no information was submitted. Important information about this summary: To protect confidential business information, in some cases quantitative data is presented in ranges and qualitative data is excluded. Qualitative data includes information that characterizes and categorizes information [e.g., company names, North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, specified uses, Substance Function Codes, and Application Codes]. Since the dataset does not include confidential business information, the figures presented may be an underestimate. Code 999 "Other" was provided for a Substance Function Code or an Application Code, it indicates that the codes listed in the Notice did not apply and a description of the function or use was required. Please refer to the Notice or guidance document for further details on data collected. Supplemental Information Useful links: https://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2018/2018-11-17/html/notice-avis-eng.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/chemicals-management-plan/initiatives/transparency-risk-assessment-activities.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/inventory-updates.html https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/eccc/documents/pdf/pded/quats/Guidance-manual-QAC.pdf https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/eccc/documents/pdf/pded/quats/20190312-QAC-s-46-substances-en-fr.xlsx