Anonymity, especially with healthcare, is usually treated as a spectrum, with a (somewhat arbitrary) cutoff.
For instance, let's say you want to study how much a variety of lifestyle factors influence some rare disease. Is the fact that a person has this disease and lives in a certain zip code enough to identify them? Depends how rare the disease is and how populated the zip code is. How about if you add in age? Ethnicity? Is narrowing it down to 10 or so people still anonymous enough? Etc.
I guess my larger point is there probably isn't a simple practical one-sentence test for anonymity. And giving google eye scans, diagnosis info, and maybe some basic demographics and no other PII seems fine by me, personally.
I don't think is a bad thing on any level, I just hope they are required to publish the research as part of the deal so hospitals and researchers across the world can replicate the results
My interpretation of anonymity includes the test, "If I have the data and the person in the same room, is it super-duper easy to match them up?"