Authoritarian, often tyrannical, sometimes fascistic and by default oppressive operations/organisations, tend to seek legitimacy. Legitimacy minimises the cost of control as it creates an obeying population that follows the rules from their own volition.
A bit of a research of history, might conjour up how, for example, fascist tyrannies, would excuse behaviour by claims for the general benefit of most people, medically correct as it might be, to advance a legitimisation of their rule. (..as the regime can paint itself as a fair system of governance for all..)
Following the Nazies – see link above – we have google. An authoritarian and tyrannical operation that seeks to control, oppress opposition (eg buying companies/patents and using size-might to scare and push others out of its way, as well as using its public of users for profit without providing a meaningful controlling mechanism, or even a rout to it..) and minimise users input to channels it prefers for its own profiteering – hence we get google’s attempt to convince people it rather fancies them being healthy and fit.
How to distinguish between a google fitness app and, for example, a potential NHS one?
They might do the same thing, no?
Well, they might. However, there are, in my view, a few crucial differences:
* with nhs, so long as its public, the data given about your life will stay between you and yourself. Google, this way or another, fancies you telling a genuine story about yourself for gaining ad revenues.
* with nhs, as long as its public, we get some measure of social, cultural and political interaction based on dialogues, not just power, and the possibility of more democratic routs for our health.
* with nhs, we get to have the possibility of being a part of a process that, because it actually cares, might add/delete options according to medical findings – not as the case is with an operation such as google – where it might very well be hard to tell when financial concerns re options of fitness might begin and a genuine medical issue begins. This is precisely because the concern, like in a tyrannical regime – is for ruling people, not for benefiting people.