Healthy Skepticism Library item: 13739
Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.
Publication type: news
Fernandez E.
Bill would let pharmacies sell medical records
San Francisco Chronicle 2008 May 28
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/05/28/BAJC10U9GB.DTL
Full text:
Pharmacies in California would be allowed to sell confidential patient prescription information to third-party marketing firms working for drug companies under a bill expected to be voted on Thursday by the state Senate.
The legislation would allow pharmaceutical firms to send mailings directly to patients. Supporters of the proposal say the intent is to remind patients to take their medicine and order refills. But consumer privacy advocates are outraged.
“This bill would be a windfall for corporations seeking to track, buy and sell a patient’s private medical records,” said Zack Kaldveer, spokesman for the Consumer Federation of California. “This would represent a significant intrusion by pharmaceutical companies into the privacy of patients.
“By opening this Pandora’s box, consumers could wind up receiving mailings designed to look as if they came from the pharmacy yet conflict with what their pharmacist or doctor has recommended. Such a scenario would be a threat to their health.”
The California Medical Association opposes the legislation, contending that it could jeopardize patient safety and hurt doctor-patient relationships. The mailings are particularly problematic for patients with sensitive medical issues such as mental illnesses, says the association.
People receiving medication for a litany of illnesses, including cancer, diabetes, asthma, osteoporosis, depression, hypertension and heart disease, could receive the letters.
“The point is to tell people to take the drug as prescribed and to refill it,” said Rocky Rushing, a spokesman for the author, Sen. Ron Calderon, D-Montebello (Los Angeles County).
He said many people fail to follow medication directions.
Dr. Rupin Thakkar, a board member of the National Physicians Alliance, considers the proposed legislation a pharmaceutical ploy to gain access to important patient information.
“It’s as if you were shopping in a supermarket and someone was following you and saying for everything you buy, ‘You should try something different,’ “ said Thakkar, who practices in Edmonds, Wash.
“It’s a horrible invasion of privacy – it amounts to marketing directly to patients in their homes. One’s health care information absolutely needs to be private.”
Last week, the Senate defeated the bill, SB1096, on a 17-17 vote, but Calderon amended it to allow patients to opt-out when they pick up their prescriptions.
“You pick up your meds and have the opportunity to opt out,” said spokesman Rushing. “It’s similar to waiving your right to consult with the pharmacist. We are trying to strike a balance. … There was a lot of concern about people being forced into a program where they had no say-so.”
But consumer groups say it’s unfair to place the burden on patients to halt a marketing practice.
“We’re concerned that people won’t notice it or won’t understand what it means,” said Jerry Flanagan of Consumer Watchdog.
A primary backer of the bill is Adheris Inc, a subsidiary of a drug marketing company that was sued several years ago under its former name for privacy violations. Adheris is involved in a pending class-action lawsuit in San Diego involving the same issues in the Calderon bill.
California has one of the nation’s strongest medical privacy laws. Under the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, direct mail marketing to patients by pharmaceutical firms is not permitted.
