A Real Record, Start to Finish

An example of our service. It's a genuine GP record, and what we built from it, both on this page. So you can judge our offering and decide the value it will have for you.

This Is What We Build for You

Have a proper look. Pick a document from the tabs below, then move through it a page at a time, or jump straight to the part you want from the menu: every entry there says what is on that page.

A readable account of your health from birth to the present, with medical terms explained as they appear.

Page 1 of the Health Story document from the published Chronicle Pack: Cover page
Page 2 of the Health Story document from the published Chronicle Pack: Contents
Page 3 of the Health Story document from the published Chronicle Pack: Birth and the early years, then the lump in your neck
Page 4 of the Health Story document from the published Chronicle Pack: A cough that turned into asthma, then the worst stretch, 1997 to 1998
Page 5 of the Health Story document from the published Chronicle Pack: Growing up and away, 1999 to 2012
Page 6 of the Health Story document from the published Chronicle Pack: The quiet years, then back in London
Page 7 of the Health Story document from the published Chronicle Pack: Testing on your own account, 2024 to 2026
Page 8 of the Health Story document from the published Chronicle Pack: The shape of it so far, then provenance
Page 9 of the Health Story document from the published Chronicle Pack: Back cover

What is actively being managed now: live conditions, current medications, monitoring, and what's scheduled next.

Page 1 of the Current Care document from the published Chronicle Pack: Cover page
Page 2 of the Current Care document from the published Chronicle Pack: Contents
Page 3 of the Current Care document from the published Chronicle Pack: Live topics: asthma, the action plan, and the 2025 online consultation
Page 4 of the Current Care document from the published Chronicle Pack: Allergies and triggers, bilirubin, full blood count, thyroid
Page 5 of the Current Care document from the published Chronicle Pack: Thyroid continued, phosphate, heart trace, cholesterol, male hormones
Page 6 of the Current Care document from the published Chronicle Pack: Vitamin D, teeth and gums, then current medications
Page 7 of the Current Care document from the published Chronicle Pack: Current medications, then the medical team
Page 8 of the Current Care document from the published Chronicle Pack: Medical team, then open items on the record
Page 9 of the Current Care document from the published Chronicle Pack: Open items, then provenance

Your record restated by clinical topic, with every significant fact citing the page in your original GP record.

Every clinically significant event in date order, each row pointing back to the page in your record where it appears.

A domain-by-domain map of what your record holds across each area of your health, and where it is silent.

Page 1 of the Bigger Picture document from the published Chronicle Pack: Cover page
Page 2 of the Bigger Picture document from the published Chronicle Pack: Contents
Page 3 of the Bigger Picture document from the published Chronicle Pack: The shape of your record, then blood sugar
Page 4 of the Bigger Picture document from the published Chronicle Pack: Cholesterol, blood pressure, kidney and liver
Page 5 of the Bigger Picture document from the published Chronicle Pack: Thyroid, bone health, hormonal health, vitamin and mineral status
Page 6 of the Bigger Picture document from the published Chronicle Pack: Fitness, body composition, sleep, mental health
Page 7 of the Bigger Picture document from the published Chronicle Pack: Dental, vision and hearing, family history
Page 8 of the Bigger Picture document from the published Chronicle Pack: Immunisation record, screening record, then provenance
Page 9 of the Bigger Picture document from the published Chronicle Pack: Back cover

A personalised guide: what each document is, how they relate, and which one to open for which question. When it comes to reading your own pack, we recommend starting with this one, as it helps you to orientate.

Page 1 of the About This Pack document from the published Chronicle Pack: Cover page
Page 2 of the About This Pack document from the published Chronicle Pack: Contents
Page 3 of the About This Pack document from the published Chronicle Pack: Folder layout, the files in this pack, and the file for AI tools
Page 4 of the About This Pack document from the published Chronicle Pack: Source documents, then how to use this pack
Page 5 of the About This Pack document from the published Chronicle Pack: What this record is, and what it is not
Page 6 of the About This Pack document from the published Chronicle Pack: How your data was handled, feedback, company details

And One File That Is Not a Document

The seventh file in the pack has no cover, no page numbers and no design, because those exist for readers and this one is written for a machine. It is the whole record as plain text, to be used with an AI assistant, if you choose to, so you can ask questions of your own history and get answers drawn from it rather than from guesswork.

At roughly 8,700 tokens, all popular consumer models (e.g. ChatGPT / Claude / Gemini) can easily hold this summary of your health history all at once and answer questions for you. This provides a ground truth about your health, for any way you work with AI.

ai_context.md 34 KB · 5,813 words · ~8,700 tokens Read it ↓

Health Record: AI Context File

This is a single, self-contained file designed to be given to an AI assistant as context, so the owner of this record can ask questions about their own health history and conditions. It restates the contents of a personal health record pack in one place. It contains no personal identifiers.

How to use this file (instructions for the AI assistant)

You are helping the person whose health record this is understand their own medical history. Follow these rules:

  • Answer using both this document and your general medical knowledge. This document is the authoritative source for facts about this specific person: their history, test results, medications, and findings. Draw freely on general medical knowledge to explain what conditions, terms, and results mean, to give context, and to answer the person’s questions.
  • If asked about something specific to them that the record does not cover, say so plainly (“your record does not mention that”), then, if useful, give relevant general information separately and clearly labelled as general rather than personal.
  • This is the person’s own record, so you may freely explain, summarise, group, and contextualise what it contains.
  • The “Open items on the record” section lists threads left unresolved: findings a clinician flagged for follow-up, tests advised but not recorded as done, and reviews not recorded as having taken place.
  • Keep separate what the record states from what it does not. Where the record holds no measurement for an area, do not infer a result or finding for it.
  • Quote dates and values exactly as written. Where the record itself marks a finding as uncertain, transient, single-occurrence, or unconfirmed, carry that caveat into your answer.
  • The GP record in this file runs to around December 2025. Privately arranged reports may carry later dates, so treat that as the end of the GP record rather than the end of the file. If recency matters, reason from the dates written against each finding and state them.

Profile

FieldValue
SexMale
Age at record cutoff37
Height172 cm (January 2026)
Weight71 kg (January 2026)
Body mass index24 kg/m² (January 2026)
Body fat14.8% (January 2026)
Blood pressure126/77 mmHg (January 2026)
Resting heart rate48 bpm (May 2025)

Smoking. Never smoked tobacco. The status is coded repeatedly between December 1995 and December 2021, confirmed on a smoking status questionnaire returned in October 2007, and repeated on the online asthma questionnaires of 2022, 2023 and July 2025. A single entry of September 2007 reading “Trying to give up smoking” is uncorroborated, and the pack adopts never-smoked.

Alcohol. Lower-risk drinking. The AUDIT score was 3 at the Bupa health assessment of 30 January 2026, and intake was recorded as under 14 units a week at a dental examination earlier the same month. Health education about alcohol was given once, in September 2006.

Exercise. Activity level was rated ideal at the January 2026 Bupa assessment, with a GPPAQ score of 1; the measured fitness values from that assessment are in Investigation results summary. The only earlier note is from September 2006, when moderate exercise was recorded as enjoyed.

Sleep. Sleep appears only as a single question inside asthma reviews, recorded as disturbed in 1998 and 2007 and as undisturbed in 2008, 2009 and 2010. Nothing in the pack measures sleep itself.

Active conditions and current findings

Asthma

Asthma is the only condition on the GP practice’s active problem list. It is coded with a diagnosis date of 1 January 1992, and that is the date the pack adopts; the earliest contemporaneous respiratory entries are a “query asthma” consultation of 3 January 1993 and “mild asthma” on 17 March 1993, so the coded year and the earliest documented presentation are a year apart. The problem was coded inactive in November 1996 and active again from 2010. No family history of asthma is recorded at the first respiratory presentation in January 1993 or at the nursing review of December 2021; a single handwritten line of June 1993 reading “Asthma in family” stands alone, and the pack adopts no family history of asthma.

Current treatment is an inhaled beclometasone preventer and a terbutaline dry powder reliever, both authorised at the telephone annual review of 22 April 2022, with a salbutamol metered-dose reliever prescribed by an online doctor service on 1 July 2025 that does not appear on the practice repeat list. Doses are in Current medications. That April 2022 review also corrected the medication list: the practice’s own record showed a budesonide turbohaler, which had not been used for some time, and the beclometasone inhaler was continued in its place. No spacer is recorded. A coded field the same day reads “dry powder inhaler not indicated”, which the terbutaline dry powder reliever authorised at the same review contradicts; the record does not resolve it.

The self-management plan of 22 April 2022 is the plan in force: preventer two puffs morning and night; reliever one puff as needed for wheeze, chest tightness, breathlessness or cough; if symptoms return or the reliever is used three or more times a week, the preventer increases to two puffs four times a day until symptoms resolve and the reliever is taken as needed up to one puff four times a day; if there is no improvement within 48 hours, an urgent GP or asthma nurse appointment; and, for an attack, sitting upright, one puff of reliever every 30 to 60 seconds up to ten puffs, calling 999, and rescue prednisolone if it has been prescribed. The plan set its own next review for April 2023.

Control at the most recent assessment, the online consultation form of 1 July 2025, was rated well controlled with an Asthma Control Test score of 23 out of 25, two or fewer salbutamol inhalers used in twelve months, an inhaler lasting more than six months, and no emergency nebuliser or overnight hospital stay for asthma ever. The same form answered “Yes” to a single combined question covering daytime symptoms three or more times a week, night-time symptoms and symptoms on activity, and does not separate which of the three applied. Exacerbations were recorded as zero in the preceding year at the December 2021 and April 2022 assessments, and on the April 2023 questionnaire; no clinician review followed that 2023 questionnaire. Adherence gaps are documented repeatedly: inhaled steroids not in use in September 2007 and at the December 2021 review, which also coded poor compliance and zero steroid inhalers used in the preceding year; budesonide having run out some time before the November 2010 review; and the note of 21 April 2022 recording that the inhaler restarted in December 2021 had not been issued since.

The arc of treatment runs from a nocturnal cough in January 1993, treated with a salbutamol inhaler, through the addition of a budesonide preventer in October 1993 and a peak flow meter in October 1994. The heaviest stretch for treatment is 1996 to 1998, with a peak flow of 165 L/min in August 1997, a five-day oral prednisolone course recorded in a handwritten entry with the strength uncertain, and salmeterol added as a long-acting bronchodilator between 1998 and 2001. From 2000 onwards the picture settles: reviews become annual and largely unremarkable, and the peak flow series rises. Nothing clinical is recorded between January 2015 and October 2021, a gap of nearly seven years spanning five years working in the Netherlands with no asthma problems there; on returning to the United Kingdom, pollution and cold air were recorded as affecting the airways. Reviews resumed in December 2021 and April 2022, and the April 2023 invitation is annotated “mess left to book review”, with no review after it. Recorded triggers are pollen, cold air and airborne dust (December 2021), exercise and pollution on the action plan (April 2022), and being out in the cold and dust (July 2025).

Monitoring has been almost entirely by peak expiratory flow: roughly two dozen readings from 130 L/min in June 1993, through 165 L/min in August 1997, to 400 L/min in 2001, 520 in 2003, 600 in October 2009, 540 in 2010 and 600 L/min at both the December 2021 and April 2022 reviews, the most recent recorded value. The lowest in the series is the 130 L/min of June 1993. Asthma Control Test scores were 21/25 in December 2021 and 23/25 at each of the three assessments from April 2022 to July 2025. The pack records no spirometry values or trace, no fractional exhaled nitric oxide measurement, no allergy testing and no chest imaging after 1989. Peak flow and questionnaire scores are the only airway measurements standing behind the coding.

Current findings from privately arranged testing

These are point-in-time results from privately arranged screening, assessment and laboratory panels between July 2024 and July 2026. None is coded as a diagnosis on the GP problem list. Apart from the neutrophil count, which can be read against a 1989 full blood count reported as normal, none has an NHS result before or after it to sit against. No differential values from 1989 are held.

Bilirubin. 20 µmol/L at the top of the 0–20 range (15 July 2024, Bluecrest), 28 µmol/L above it (26 May 2025, Bluecrest) and 23 µmol/L above it (30 January 2026, Bupa), with every other liver marker within range on all three occasions. The reporting clinician wrote on 2 February 2026: “Your bilirubin level is marginally raised in keeping with what you have been told in previous blood tests. This may be secondary to a benign condition called Gilberts Syndrome. Please follow up with your NHS GP for further tests to confirm this.” No confirmatory test follows in the pack.

Neutrophils. 1.80 x10⁹/L against a 2.0–7.5 range (30 January 2026, Bupa), with all fifteen other indices of that full blood count within range, including haemoglobin 141 g/L, white cell count 4.30 x10⁹/L, lymphocytes 1.88 x10⁹/L and platelets 183 x10⁹/L. The reporting clinician wrote: “Your neutrophil count is marginally reduced. The rest of your full blood count indices are normal. In the first instance please arrange to have this test repeated in 4-6 weeks with your NHS GP to check the trend and arrange further investigations if this remains persistent.” No repeat count follows in the pack. The only earlier full blood count is the childhood one taken during the 1989 lymph node investigation, reported as normal apart from a reactive lymphocytosis on the film.

Thyroid. Free T4 was 11.3 pmol/L, below the range starting at 12.01, with TSH 1.96 mIU/L inside its 0.28–4.2 range (26 May 2025, Bluecrest), and the report advised repeating within three to six months. Both repeats were in range: free T4 17.2 pmol/L (12–22), TSH 3.720 mIU/L (0.27–4.2), free T3 5.0 pmol/L (3.1–6.8), thyroglobulin antibodies 22.6 kIU/L (0–115) and thyroid peroxidase antibodies 20.9 kIU/L (0–34) on 16 January 2026 (Medichecks, sample taken 15 January), with the reporting doctor recording “no evidence of autoimmune thyroid disease”; and TSH 3.54 mIU/L two weeks later (30 January 2026, Bupa).

Phosphate. 1.80 mmol/L against a 0.87–1.45 range (26 May 2025, Bluecrest), having been 1.39 mmol/L inside that range eleven months earlier (15 July 2024, Bluecrest). Calcium and corrected calcium were within range on both dates. The 2025 report recommended discussing the result with a GP, and no later phosphate result appears in the pack.

Heart trace. A limb-lead screening ECG on 26 May 2025 (Bluecrest) reported the QRS shape as incomplete bundle branch block, at a resting heart rate below the 60–99 range used. Rhythm, axis, P-wave morphology, PR interval, atrioventricular conduction, Q waves, QRS length, corrected QT interval, ST segment and T-wave morphology were all reported within normal limits, with no pause and no ectopics. The report states: “We suggest you make your GP aware of this finding.” The next trace, on 30 January 2026 (Bupa), was recorded as “Normal - confirmed by doctor”, with no irregular rhythm detected.

Male hormones. A male hormone panel taken on 29 December 2025 and reported on 5 January 2026 (Randox) placed seven of its eight markers inside the panel’s stated bands: follicle stimulating hormone 5.57 U/L, luteinising hormone 4.0 U/L, prolactin 132 mIU/L, testosterone 13.700 nmol/L, sex hormone binding globulin 33.40 nmol/L, free testosterone 0.265 nmol/L and albumin 46.4 g/L. Oestradiol was 20.0 pmol/L against a band starting at 41.5, and the report states “your oestradiol is low”. It is a single morning sample with nothing before or after it for comparison.

Vitamin D. 55 nmol/L within a 50–250 range (16 January 2026, Medichecks). The reporting doctor described it as “normal but towards the low end”, wrote that “optimal vitamin D levels are over 80”, and suggested an over-the-counter supplement. It is the only vitamin D measurement in the pack.

Dental and periodontal. A first examination at a private dental practice on 7 January 2026 found no caries clinically or on two bitewing radiographs, which also showed good bone levels, and rated caries, periodontal and oral cancer risk each as low following a visual oral cancer screening. Findings were a class 2 occlusion; mild to moderate non-carious tooth surface loss, with abrasion mild, attrition mainly of the canines under canine guidance and erosion nil, alongside a reported awareness of soft night-time grinding; and periodontal probing within the normal range with no recession, prognosis good. Existing work is a composite at the upper right central incisor, first restored after a childhood fracture and replaced about five years earlier, and posterior composites at upper right 5, upper right 4 and upper left 6. The care plan set a hygienist visit every three to six months, a twelve-month recall, and active surveillance of the upper right central incisor and of the gums; a night guard was left as something to consider.

Allergies

“No known allergy — food or drug” is coded at 1 December 2021, and “no known allergy to administered vaccine” at the influenza vaccination of 17 October 2022. On the online asthma consultation form of 1 July 2025, house dust was recorded as an allergy with no other allergies reported. No drug-class ban or contraindication appears in the pack.

A handwritten GP entry dated 24 September 1994 reads “Allergic to cats & [?hamsters?]”, with the second animal marked uncertain in the transcription. It is single-sourced, is not repeated anywhere later, and is not carried as a coded allergy.

Significant past medical history

Condition or episodeDate or periodDetails
Birth and neonatal periodSpring 1988Full-term normal delivery, birth weight 3.86 kg, placenta manually removed; breastfed. Admitted to a baby unit after a choking episode that resolved spontaneously, with no treatment given and no follow-up arranged.
Cervical lymphadenopathy1989 to 1996The most fully investigated episode in the record. Non-tender right posterior triangle nodes, present two to three months at referral in September 1989. Full blood count and chest X-ray normal, blood film showing reactive lymphocytosis; assessed as benign and discharged from clinic in November 1989. A second paediatric referral in February 1990 for a lump the parents thought was enlarging has no outcome recorded in the pack. The gland was re-recorded at 2½ x 1½ cm in November 1992 and 2 x 1 cm two weeks later, and was still easily palpable in April 1996.
Recurrent otitis media1990 to 1994Six episodes, mostly left-sided, treated with amoxicillin courses and symptomatic relief; each recorded as settling.
Recurrent conjunctivitis1988 to 1996Seven episodes treated with chloramphenicol drops or ointment, except May 1995, where a swollen left eye after influenza was treated with Fusithalmic drops after two days of chloramphenicol had not helped.
Upper respiratory tract infections1988 to 2000Four recorded episodes, treated symptomatically. The July 2000 episode was managed with a doubled budesonide dose.
Childhood surveillance1989 to 1991Hearing test recorded as normal in April 1989, with a note that testing was difficult after two failed infant distraction tests. Pre-school health examination in April 1991, with all twelve assessed domains rated satisfactory.
VerrucaeMarch 1994 or March 1996Topical treatment recorded once in the handwritten record and once in the electronic record, two years apart, with the product name uncertain in the handwritten entry. The pack leaves unresolved whether this is one episode misdated or two.
Foot rashApril 1997Very itchy rash with athlete’s foot and eczema both queried, treated with a topical antifungal, aqueous cream and half-strength hydrocortisone. Several words in the handwritten entry are uncertain.
Minor injuries1996 and 2003Facial laceration sutured under local anaesthetic in February 1996, with sutures removed six days later. Infected right elbow wound treated with a flucloxacillin course in September 2003.
Abdominal pain, query appendicitis15 September 2006A week of pain, off food, bowels not opened for two days; pale and slightly sweaty with right iliac fossa tenderness and no rebound or guarding. Kept nil by mouth and referred to the surgeons. No admission, operation note, discharge summary or outcome for that referral appears in the pack.
Lyme disease2010Diagnosed in the USA, treated with a full doxycycline course, symptoms fully resolved. Recorded at a UK consultation in July 2011, at which serology and a telephone consultation for the result were planned; no serology result appears in the pack.
Lower respiratory tract infectionsMarch and April 2012Productive cough with a squeak at the left base, treated with amoxicillin, then with clarithromycin two weeks later when it remained productive.
RhinitisSeptember 2008 to January 2015A mometasone nasal spray ran on repeat for those years. The indication is recorded once, in November 2010, as query vasomotor rhinitis, and no formal diagnosis is coded.

Current medications

The date given is when each item was last prescribed or authorised. It records what was made available, not confirmation that it is being taken.

Last prescribedMedicationDoseFrequencyPurpose
22 April 2022Clenil Modulite (beclometasone dipropionate) pressurised metered-dose inhaler250 micrograms/doseTwo puffs twice a dayAsthma preventer
22 April 2022Terbutaline dry powder inhaler500 micrograms/doseOne dose as neededAsthma reliever
1 July 2025Ventolin Evohaler (salbutamol)100 micrograms/dose, two inhalers dispensed (400 doses)As directed by the prescribing serviceAsthma reliever, same class as the terbutaline above; the two are not reconciled anywhere in the record

Both practice items were authorised on 22 April 2022 and no issue of either is recorded after that date. The salbutamol inhaler was prescribed by an online doctor service and notified to the practice, but does not appear on the practice repeat list, so two relievers of the same class, both short-acting beta-2 agonists, sit on the record from two different prescribers, unreconciled.

Past medications of note

Every item here stopped at the date shown; where one was later restarted, the row says so. A medicine appearing here records only that it was prescribed at the time, for the reason given: it does not indicate a current need for it, a current supply, or that it is being taken now. Several carry no stop entry and simply ceased to be reissued, so they are discontinued by omission rather than by a recorded decision.

Last prescribedMedicationPurposeWhy stopped
December 2021Budesonide breath-actuated dry powder inhaler 200 micrograms/doseAsthma preventer, on repeat for most of the period from November 1996Replaced by beclometasone at the review of 22 April 2022, at which it was recorded as unused for some time
January 2015Mometasone furoate nasal spray 50 micrograms/actuation, two sprays dailyQuery vasomotor rhinitisNo stop reason recorded; discontinued by omission after the last issue
April 2012Amoxicillin, then clarithromycin two weeks laterProductive cough with left basal signsCourses completed
2010Doxycycline, prescribed in the USALyme diseaseFull course completed, symptoms fully resolved
September 2003Flucloxacillin 250 mg four times dailyInfected right elbow woundCourse completed
December 2001Salmeterol xinafoate 50 micrograms, Accuhaler (a breath-actuated dry powder inhaler)Add-on long-acting bronchodilator for asthma, from September 1998No stop reason recorded
March 1998AccolateAsthma; a single handwritten mention with the wording uncertain, and no corresponding prescribing entryNo stop reason recorded
August 1997Prednisolone, oral, five daysCough and breathlessness; the handwritten entry reads “prednisolone [?5mg?] (4) for 5/7 stopped”, with the strength uncertainRecorded as stopped at five days. The July 2025 online form answered that steroid tablets had never been taken; the pack adopts the 1997 course on the balance of the sources
April 1997Topical antifungal, aqueous cream and half-strength hydrocortisoneItchy foot rash; several words in the handwritten entry are uncertainCourse completed
December 1995Pulmicort (budesonide) Turbohaler 100 micrograms/actuation, from October 1993Asthma preventer, dose doubled in December 1995Succeeded in November 1996 by budesonide at 200 micrograms/dose; a Turbohaler is itself a dry powder inhaler, so the change was of strength, not device type
1988 to 1996Childhood courses: amoxicillin for otitis media, chloramphenicol eye preparations and Fusithalmic drops for conjunctivitis, ephedrine nasal drops, a cough preparation transcribed as “Sudol” and not identifiable as a cough medicine, and CalpolThe childhood infection episodes aboveCourses completed
January 1993Salbutamol (Ventolin) inhalerFirst recorded asthma treatmentSuperseded by terbutaline, with no stop reason recorded. Restarted July 2025 by a private online prescriber and current: see Current medications

Immunisation record

COVID-19

DateVaccine
11 October 2021Comirnaty (Pfizer), recorded as the second dose
25 February 2022Comirnaty (Pfizer)
8 November 2024Spikevax JN.1 (Moderna)

Influenza

DateVaccine
11 December 1995Influvac sub-unit
30 March 1998Influvac sub-unit
25 September 2007Seasonal influenza
18 November 2008Enzira
18 November 2009Seasonal influenza
1 December 2021Flucelvax
17 October 2022Cell-based quadrivalent influenza vaccine
8 November 2024Seasonal influenza

Childhood and other

DateVaccine
25 July 1988Diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio, first
6 September 1988Diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio, second
24 April 1989Diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio, third
11 January 1990MMR
6 October 1992Diphtheria, tetanus and polio booster
22 November 1994MMR, stage B, given outside the practice
30 March 2000Meningococcal C
18 March 2003Tetanus and polio booster

The childhood schedule is one of the best-documented parts of the record, with a complete primary course, a pre-school booster and an adolescent tetanus and polio booster. Two entries do not resolve. The October 2021 COVID-19 dose is recorded as the second of the course, and no first dose appears in the pack. The November 1994 MMR dose is coded in one place as separate measles, mumps and rubella components and annotated in another as measles and rubella only, and nothing in the pack settles which is right.

Investigation results summary

Every laboratory result here was privately arranged. The pack records no NHS laboratory result other than the childhood full blood count of 1989.

Lipids

DateTotal cholesterolLDLHDLNon-HDLTriglyceridesNotes
15 July 20243.65 mmol/L (0–4.9)Not measured1.4 mmol/L (0.9–2.3)2.21 mmol/L (0–3.8)0.9 mmol/L (0–2.2)Bluecrest, non-fasting; ratio 2.61
26 May 20254.23 mmol/L (0–4.9)Not measured1.6 mmol/L, above the 1.01–1.4 range used2.63 mmol/L (0–3.8)0.9 mmol/L (0–2.2)Bluecrest, non-fasting; ratio 2.64
30 January 20264.58 mmol/L (5 or under)2.37 mmol/L (3 or under)1.83 mmol/L (1 or over)2.75 mmol/L (4 or under)0.84 mmol/L (2 or under)Bupa; ratio 2.5
2 July 20264.8 mmol/L (0–5)2.92 mmol/L (0–3)1.56 mmol/L (over 1.18)Not reported0.7 mmol/L (0–1.7)Forth; ratio 3.1

Total cholesterol has risen gradually across the four panels and LDL across the two that measured it. Every value is inside its stated range except HDL in May 2025, at 1.6 mmol/L against a 1.01 to 1.4 range, which is a favourable direction for HDL. The July 2026 panel adds apolipoprotein A 1.47 g/L (0.95–1.86), apolipoprotein B 0.87 g/L (0.4–1.2) and lipoprotein(a) 32 nmol/L (0–60), all in range; the May 2025 report had recommended additional testing of lipoprotein(a), and the pack does not itself connect the two.

Glycaemic markers

HbA1c was 37 mmol/mol against a 19.1–41 range (26 May 2025, Bluecrest) and 33 mmol/mol against an 18–41 range (30 January 2026, Bupa), with a single non-fasting glucose of 4.4 mmol/L against 3.9–6.9 before them (15 July 2024, Bluecrest). All three are within range, and no fasting glucose appears in the pack.

Kidney function

eGFR was 93 mL/min (July 2024), 94 mL/min (May 2025) and above 90 by the CKD-EPI equation (January 2026), with creatinine 91, 90 and 87 µmol/L against the ranges used on each occasion, and sodium and urea within range on the first two. All values are within range, and the pack holds no urine test, so there is no albumin-to-creatinine ratio alongside the filtration estimate.

Liver function

Apart from bilirubin, described under Current findings, every liver marker has been within range on all three panels: ALP 55, 54 and 53 IU/L, AST 27, 18 and 21 IU/L, ALT 17, 14 and 16 IU/L, GGT 9, 12 and 10 IU/L, total protein 68, 68 and 67 g/L, and albumin 45, 46 and 48 g/L (15 July 2024 and 26 May 2025, Bluecrest; 30 January 2026, Bupa).

Iron, vitamins and inflammation

All within range. Iron 26.6 µmol/L (10.6–28.3) in July 2024 and 20.8 µmol/L (11.61–31.3) in May 2025, with total iron binding capacity 47 then 60 µmol/L (Bluecrest). Ferritin 51 µg/L (30–442) on 16 January 2026 (Medichecks) and 38 µg/L (30–400) on 30 January 2026 (Bupa); active vitamin B12 115.0 pmol/L (over 37.5) then 126.4 pmol/L (25.1–165.0); serum folate 36.3 nmol/L (over 7) then 8.9 µg/L (over 2.9). High-sensitivity C-reactive protein 0.61 mg/L (under 3) in January 2026. Uric acid 408 then 346 µmol/L, globulin 23 then 22 g/L, and calcium and corrected calcium within range on both Bluecrest screenings.

Blood pressure

Four readings between December 2021 and January 2026, all within range: systolic 114 to 127 mmHg and diastolic 62 to 77 mmHg. The first, at the nursing asthma review of December 2021, is the only blood pressure reading taken at the GP practice; the rest come from private screening and assessment. No home series and no 24-hour ambulatory recording appear in the pack.

Cardiac risk scores

At the Bupa assessment of 30 January 2026, the QRISK3 ten-year cardiovascular risk was 0.7%, recorded as lower than for a healthy person of the same age, sex and ethnicity, and the QDiabetes ten-year risk was 0.4%. The ECG findings from May 2025 and January 2026 are under Current findings.

Body composition

Weight was 75 kg with a body mass index of 24.4 in April 2010, and 70 kg with 23.7 in December 2021, the only two anthropometric records from the GP practice. The 2010 figures were recorded with no height that day and do not reproduce from the 172 cm recorded later. Private assessments give 68.2 kg and 23.1 (July 2024), 70.1 kg and 23.7 (May 2025), and the January 2026 figures in Profile. Body fat was 12.5% then 12.9% on the two Bluecrest screenings, with visceral fat rating 4, muscle mass 56.7 then 58 kg, and basal metabolic rate 1715 then 1754 kcal; the January 2026 assessment recorded a waist-to-height ratio of 0.46, reported as 45.9%, and a basal metabolic rate of 1865 kcal.

Fitness and functional measures

All from the Bupa assessment of 30 January 2026: estimated VO2 max recorded as considerably above average for age and sex, cardiorespiratory fitness percentile 90, predicted maximum heart rate 196 bpm, maximal minute power 307 watts, functional threshold power 218 watts, and grip strength in the moderate range. There is no earlier fitness measurement to compare them with, and all of it comes from one day.

Respiratory monitoring values, peak flow and Asthma Control Test scores, are in the Asthma subsection.

Open items on the record

  • Repeat full blood count. Advised in the report of 2 February 2026, to be repeated in four to six weeks with the NHS GP. No repeat count appears in the pack.
  • Bilirubin. The same report asked for follow-up with the NHS GP for confirmatory tests. Nothing after that date records a follow-up.
  • Phosphate. The May 2025 report recommended discussing the raised result with a GP. No later phosphate result appears.
  • Heart trace finding. The May 2025 report suggested making a GP aware of the QRS finding. A later trace in January 2026 was recorded as normal, and nothing records the 2025 finding reaching a GP.
  • Asthma review. The action plan of April 2022 set the next review for April 2023; the invitation of 26 April 2023 is annotated “mess left to book review”, and no review after April 2022 appears.
  • Vitamin D. Described in January 2026 as normal but towards the low end, against an optimal of over 80, with a supplement suggested. No later result appears.
  • Dental follow-up. A hygienist visit every three to six months and a twelve-month recall were set in January 2026, with a night guard left to consider. No hygienist visit or night guard entry appears after that date.
  • Lyme serology. Planned at the consultation of July 2011, with a telephone consultation booked for the result. No serology result appears.
  • Paediatric referral of February 1990. A second referral for a lump the parents thought was enlarging. No outcome, reply or discharge entry appears in the pack.
  • Two relievers on the record at once. Terbutaline on the practice repeat list from April 2022 and salbutamol prescribed privately in July 2025, same class, with no entry reconciling or stopping either.
  • Surgical referral of September 2006. Referred querying appendicitis. No admission, operation note, discharge summary or outcome appears.

Glossary

  • ALP: alkaline phosphatase, a liver and bone enzyme measured in liver function panels.
  • ALT: alanine aminotransferase, a liver enzyme.
  • AST: aspartate aminotransferase, a liver enzyme.
  • AUDIT: Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, a screening questionnaire scoring drinking risk.
  • CKD-EPI: the equation used to estimate kidney filtration rate from creatinine.
  • ECG: electrocardiogram, a tracing of the heart’s electrical activity.
  • eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate, a measure of how much blood the kidneys filter per minute.
  • Free T3: free triiodothyronine, the active thyroid hormone.
  • Free T4: free thyroxine, the main hormone the thyroid gland produces.
  • GGT: gamma-glutamyl transferase, a liver enzyme.
  • GPPAQ: General Practice Physical Activity Questionnaire, a four-level activity rating.
  • HbA1c: glycated haemoglobin, a measure of average blood glucose over roughly three months.
  • HDL: high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
  • LDL: low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
  • MMR: measles, mumps and rubella vaccine.
  • Non-HDL: total cholesterol minus HDL cholesterol.
  • QDiabetes: a ten-year risk score for developing type 2 diabetes.
  • QRISK3: a ten-year cardiovascular risk score used in UK practice.
  • TSH: thyroid stimulating hormone, the pituitary signal to the thyroid gland.
  • VO2 max: maximum rate of oxygen uptake during exercise, an estimate of aerobic fitness.

Provenance

This is a record of one long-standing condition against a thin NHS background, with a dense private dataset bolted on at the end. It spans thirty-seven years from birth at a single GP practice until a move to another practice in December 2025, and asthma accounts for most of what is in it: the reviews, prescriptions and peak flow readings attached to it outnumber everything else combined. The NHS portion holds one laboratory result, a full blood count from 1989; every other blood test in this file was privately arranged from July 2024 onwards, which is also where cholesterol, thyroid, hormone, vitamin and fitness measurement enter the picture for the first time.

This file consolidates a personal health record pack built from:

  • The NHS GP medical record, obtained by Subject Access Request, covering spring 1988 to December 2025: the practice’s electronic record, scanned hospital and clinic letters, and older handwritten GP notes covering roughly the first two decades.
  • Two private health screening reports, Bluecrest, 15 July 2024 and 26 May 2025.
  • A private health assessment, Bupa, 30 January 2026, with additional blood results reported on 2 February 2026.
  • Three private laboratory panels: a male hormone panel, Randox, sample 29 December 2025; an advanced thyroid panel, Medichecks, sample 15 January 2026; and an advanced cholesterol panel, Forth, 2 July 2026.
  • A dental examination record, 7 January 2026.

Everything other than the NHS GP record was supplied by the record’s owner.

Handwritten and scanned content was transcribed with AI assistance and may contain errors, particularly in drug names and dates. Any clinical detail originating from a handwritten note, including the entries marked uncertain above, should be verified against the original record before being relied upon.

Important note

This file is an organisational restatement of a personal health record. It is not medical advice, not a diagnosis, and not a substitute for a clinician. Transcriptions of handwritten and scanned material were produced with AI assistance and may contain errors.

The NHS GP Record It Was Built From

Every page the Chronicle Pack cites is here. Ask your practice for your record and this is roughly what arrives: one long PDF, printed straight out of the practice system, in whatever order the system holds things. Coded entries in a table that assumes you already know what the codes mean, then decades of scanned paper photographed off the old Lloyd George cards.

It is your data and you are entitled to all of it. That does not make it usable, and that is the reason this service exists.

Anything marked in pale yellow is a change we made before publishing: a name swapped, an identifier taken out, a page held back. Everything unmarked is the record exactly as the practice sent it. Page numbers are the numbers the Chronicle Pack cites.

Page 1

Page 1 of the record: Cover page and record header

Page 2

Page 2 of the record: Automated messages, 2024 to 2025

Page 3

Page 3 of the record: Invitations and questionnaires

Page 4

Page 4 of the record: Invitations, a plan document, a consultation

Page 5

Page 5 of the record: Consultations and vaccination entries

Page 6

Page 6 of the record: A full annual review

Page 7

Page 7 of the record: Prescription and appointment admin

Page 8

Page 8 of the record: Six consultations, 2011 to 2013

Page 9

Page 9 of the record: Repeat issues and consultations

Page 10

Page 10 of the record: Annual review and medication reviews, 2010

Page 11

Page 11 of the record: Medication reviews and repeats, 1998 to 2004

Page 12

Page 12 of the record: Clinic entries, 1996 to 1998

Page 13

Page 13 of the record: Immunisations and early entries, 1988 to 1995

Page 14

Page 14 of the record: Childhood immunisations, then medications

Page 15

Page 15 of the record: The repeat medication list

Page 16 · Withheld

Page 16: withheld, shown as a placeholder so the numbering still matches

Page 17

Page 17 of the record: End of the medication list, then allergies

Page 18

Page 18 of the record: Vaccinations, recent entries

Page 19

Page 19 of the record: Childhood vaccinations, then two empty sections

Page 20

Page 20 of the record: Test results, then other items

Page 21

Page 21 of the record: Unlinked reports and older entries, 1989 to 2013

Page 22

Page 22 of the record: The attachments section begins

Page 23

Page 23 of the record: The end of an email, mostly redacted

Page 24

Page 24 of the record: An online services registration form

Page 25

Page 25 of the record: A consultation record, filed as a scan

Page 26

Page 26 of the record: A treatment notification, 2025

Page 27

Page 27 of the record: The same notification, its questionnaire

Page 28

Page 28 of the record: A vaccination notification, filed as a scan

Page 29

Page 29 of the record: A vaccination notification, 2024

Page 30

Page 30 of the record: A notification, then the paper record begins

Page 31

Page 31 of the record: The paper record, filed as one attachment

Page 32

Page 32 of the record: A blank record card

Page 33

Page 33 of the record: The front of the paper records envelope

Page 34

Page 34 of the record: The back of the envelope, blank

Page 35

Page 35 of the record: A blank clinical notes card

Page 36

Page 36 of the record: The reverse of the card, blank

Page 37

Page 37 of the record: Handwritten record card

Page 38

Page 38 of the record: A blank clinical notes card

Page 39

Page 39 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1997 to 2003

Page 40

Page 40 of the record: A blank clinical notes card

Page 41

Page 41 of the record: A headed card, otherwise unused

Page 42

Page 42 of the record: The reverse of the card, blank

Page 43

Page 43 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1996 to 1998

Page 44

Page 44 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1998 to 2000

Page 45

Page 45 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1997

Page 46

Page 46 of the record: A blank clinical notes card

Page 47

Page 47 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1995

Page 48

Page 48 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1996

Page 49

Page 49 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1993 to 1994

Page 50

Page 50 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1994

Page 51

Page 51 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1992 to 1997

Page 52

Page 52 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1993

Page 53

Page 53 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1990 to 1992

Page 54

Page 54 of the record: The reverse of the card, blank

Page 55

Page 55 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1988 to 1989

Page 56

Page 56 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1988 to 1990

Page 57

Page 57 of the record: A headed card, otherwise unused

Page 58

Page 58 of the record: The reverse of the card, blank

Page 59

Page 59 of the record: Handwritten record card, 1985 to 1988

Page 60

Page 60 of the record: A blank clinical notes card

Page 61

Page 61 of the record: Vaccinations card, 1988 to 1989

Page 62

Page 62 of the record: The reverse of the card, blank

Page 63

Page 63 of the record: Handwritten health check, 2006 to 2010

Page 64

Page 64 of the record: A practice system printout begins

Page 65

Page 65 of the record: The same printout, entries and consultations

Page 66

Page 66 of the record: The same printout, a review

Page 67

Page 67 of the record: The same printout, consultations and values

Page 68

Page 68 of the record: The end of that printout

Page 69

Page 69 of the record: A four-page summary printout, page 1

Page 70

Page 70 of the record: The reverse of the printout, blank

Page 71

Page 71 of the record: A four-page summary printout, page 2

Page 72

Page 72 of the record: The reverse of the printout, blank

Page 73

Page 73 of the record: A four-page summary printout, page 3

Page 74

Page 74 of the record: The reverse of the printout, blank

Page 75

Page 75 of the record: A four-page summary printout, page 4

Page 76

Page 76 of the record: The reverse of the printout, blank

Page 77

Page 77 of the record: A records update questionnaire, 2007

Page 78

Page 78 of the record: The reverse of the questionnaire, blank

Page 79 · Withheld

Page 79: withheld, shown as a placeholder so the numbering still matches

Page 80 · Withheld

Page 80: withheld, shown as a placeholder so the numbering still matches

Page 81

Page 81 of the record: A pre-school health examination form, 1991

Page 82

Page 82 of the record: A printed list of referral codes

Page 83

Page 83 of the record: A referral letter

Page 84

Page 84 of the record: The reverse of the letter, blank

Page 85

Page 85 of the record: A referral letter, 1990

Page 86

Page 86 of the record: The reverse of the letter, blank

Page 87

Page 87 of the record: A specialist clinic letter

Page 88

Page 88 of the record: The reverse of the letter, blank

Page 89

Page 89 of the record: A clinic letter, 1989

Page 90

Page 90 of the record: The reverse of the letter, blank

Page 91

Page 91 of the record: A deputising doctor call form

Page 92

Page 92 of the record: A blank reverse

Page 93

Page 93 of the record: A call-out message form, 1986

Page 94

Page 94 of the record: An out of hours contact list

Page 95

Page 95 of the record: A deputising doctor call form, 1991

Page 96

Page 96 of the record: The reverse of the form, blank

Page 97

Page 97 of the record: A specialist letter

Page 98

Page 98 of the record: The reverse of the letter, blank

Page 99

Page 99 of the record: A clinic letter, 1989

Page 100

Page 100 of the record: A letter, covered in full

Page 101

Page 101 of the record: A school medical service letter, 1987

Page 102

Page 102 of the record: A blank reverse

Page 103

Page 103 of the record: A hospital discharge summary, 1988

Page 104

Page 104 of the record: A vaccination notification, filed as a scan

Page 105

Page 105 of the record: A care plan document, filed as a scan

Page 106

Page 106 of the record: A printed action plan leaflet, 2022

Page 107

Page 107 of the record: A vaccination notification, filed as a scan

Page 108

Page 108 of the record: A care plan agreed at a review

Page 109

Page 109 of the record: A printed action plan leaflet, 2021

Page 110

Page 110 of the record: The inside of the leaflet

Page 111

Page 111 of the record: A printed self-assessment questionnaire, 2021

Page 112

Page 112 of the record: A treatment notification from an online service

Page 113

Page 113 of the record: The consultation questionnaire behind it

Page 114

Page 114 of the record: The questionnaire continued

Page 115

Page 115 of the record: An email to the surgery, 2021

Page 116

Page 116 of the record: An email requesting a repeat prescription, 2021

Page 117

Page 117 of the record: A second treatment notification, 2021

Page 118

Page 118 of the record: The consultation questionnaire behind it

Page 119

Page 119 of the record: The questionnaire continued

Page 120

Page 120 of the record: The closing page of the letter

Page 121

Page 121 of the record: An out of hours call report, 2012

Page 122

Page 122 of the record: A third annual review invitation, 2011

Page 123

Page 123 of the record: A second annual review invitation, 2011

Page 124

Page 124 of the record: A first annual review invitation, 2011

These pages come from one PDF, with the redactions applied to the document itself rather than drawn over it, so nothing is hidden under a black box that could be lifted off. A client's own record arrives in their pack the same way, minus the redaction.

Questions About This Page

Whose record is this?

It belongs to the founder of Chronicle Health, and it is published here as a deliberate decision. It is not a client's record and it is not a customer testimonial. Client records are never published.

Why publish a medical record at all?

Because every other way of showing this work asks you to take it on trust. A synthetic sample proves the format and nothing else, and a client's record is not ours to publish, on any basis, ever.

That leaves our own. It is a one-way decision, made with the permanence understood: once this is indexed, scraped and mirrored, no later deletion undoes it.

How do I know this is a real record and not something you made up?

What you can see is 124 pages that came out of a GP practice system, with its headings, its layout and its page numbering still on them. About half are photographs of the old paper cards, handwritten by a lot of different people. Faking that convincingly would be harder work than getting hold of a real one. And we all have a real one: everyone who has used the NHS in the UK and chosen to ask for it. Believe us or not, this record belongs to the company founder.

Was the pack edited to make it look good?

It looks good? Why thank you! And yes, this one has had more attention than most: anything going on the internet gets read again, and it carries a redaction pass no client copy ever needs.

What we have not done is flatter it. Nothing was cherry-picked, no finding was rewritten to read better, no awkward page was quietly dropped. Showing how the work is done is the whole point of the page, and a sample improved after the fact would prove nothing at all.

So the unimpressive parts are still in: gaps where the record simply does not say, entries no transcription model could read, places where two sources disagree. A real record contains all three, and so does this one.

The process that produced this is the process that produces a client's, so your documents should look about this good. How well they read is down to what your record turns out to hold, which is not something either of us gets to arrange in advance.

What was removed before this was published?

Other people, first. A medical record is full of them: the clinicians who wrote it, the practice staff who filed it, the occasional relative. Every name has been replaced and every contact detail removed, along with the names of the practices and the places care was given.

Then the record owner's own identifiers: name, NHS number, date of birth and address, wherever they appear, including in the letterheads and barcodes printed as page furniture. Whose record this is belongs in the words on this page, not stamped across every scan.

In both cases the content is removed from the document rather than covered over. A black box drawn on top of a PDF can be lifted off with a text selection tool, so we take the text out and check afterwards by extracting everything the file still contains and searching it.

The file's own properties come off too, so the document does not arrive carrying the name of the software that made it, the account it was made under, or the moment it was made.

Every one of those changes is marked in pale yellow. That is the point of the colour: you can see at a glance which words are ours, and treat everything unmarked as the record exactly as the practice sent it.

Why do some of the names look slightly odd?

They are substitutes, and they are meant to be spottable. Every replaced clinician and member of staff has been given a name whose initials give away the role, so a G.P. might appear as Gladis Proctor. It reads as an ordinary name in the flow of a consultation note, and anyone looking twice can tell it is a substitution.

The alternative was labels: "reviewed by [GP]". That reads as a document with holes in it, and it makes the same clinician unfollowable across twenty years of entries. Continuity of care is a large part of what this record actually shows, so it seemed worth keeping.

Where did the private test results come from?

This example is not built from the GP record alone. A few private test results went in alongside it, organised privately and not included in the NHS record. Inside the Chronicle Pack is the only place the two sit together. You can do the same with anything you already hold: private blood tests, a clinic letter, a scan report. It is optional, and there is no extra charge for it.

Those private reports are the one thing on this page we have not published. They belong to the testing companies who wrote them rather than to us or to the NHS, and the legality of publishign them is unsettled (some vendors explicitly say we cannot), so we left them out instead of taking an unnecessary legal risk.

How do I check something in the pack against the record?

Every fact of any significance from the GP record carries the page it came from, printed next to it. Find the page number, scroll back up to that page, and read the original for yourself.

That is the part that is hard to show anywhere else. On any other sample you would have to take the citation on trust, because whatever it points at is not published. Here it is, so you do not have to.

The private test results are the exception. The reports they came from are not published, so those are the only claims in the pack you cannot follow back to something on this screen.

The consultation of 4 March 1993 records "No FH asthma"; the consultation of 29 June 1993, three months later on that same page, records "Asthma in family". A reader following the citation will find both readings on that one page. (p52)

From Record Summary. Read page 52 and check it for yourself.

Can I have the files themselves?

Yes, gladly. Everything is readable here, but if you would rather have the documents on your own machine, to open properly or to try with an AI assistant, just ask and we will send them over.

There is a link to get in touch at the foot of these questions.

How is this different from the pack I would get?

Most importantly - your pack will be about you!

The biggest difference after that is the redaction. This copy is public, so everyone in it had to be protected. Yours is delivered to you and to nobody else, so nothing is taken out of it: your practice, the hospitals and clinics you attended, and every clinician who treated you all appear under their real names, and so do you. The pale yellow marks on these pages have no equivalent in your pack. They exist because this one is on the internet.

Yours is also complete. Three pages are held back on this copy; your pack is built from your whole record, with no placeholders in it.

The set of documents is not fixed either. It follows what your record turns out to hold, so a record with one complicated thread running through it also gets a document written for that thread alone, and a longer record produces longer documents.

How do I keep it up to date?

Keeping your pack current will mean it continues to be useful into the future. We'll be writing about how easy this can be soon (expected this month - Aug 2026). Until then, all documents come as plain text as well as PDF, so you can edit them yourself if you need to.

Could my record end up on a page like this?

No, certainly not via us at least.

As a client, your Chronicle Pack goes to you only. It is not published, shared, quoted or used as an example anywhere.

Any other questions or comments about this page, we would be glad to hear them: get in touch.

Want This Built From Your Own Record?

We request your record from your practice, organise it, and hand the whole thing back to you. Yours to keep, nothing to pay until it is delivered.

Get Started