[Med-privacy] WAState bill

[peter marshall]

Published February 23, 2008

Data mining ban in for tough battle
Adam Wilson

Proposals aimed at reducing the influence of drug companies on doctors'=20=

decisions are not doing well in the Legislature, faltering under=20
lawmakers' doubts and lobbying from the pharmaceutical industry.

One bill still is alive and faces a fight. Five others have failed,=20
including measures requiring drug companies to publicly report the=20
gifts they give doctors. The surviving proposal would keep drug=20
companies from looking up which doctors have not been prescribing their=20=

products and sending salespeople to visit them.

Supporters of the bill say such marketing is intrusive and coaxes=20
doctors to give their patients expensive and unnecessary drugs.

"I think most physicians, who are just finding out about this =85 find =
it=20
offensive, and find it ethically and morally shady, and it walks a fine=20=

line," said Dr. Steven Albrecht of Olympia. "It may be legal, but it=20
probably isn't really the right thing to do. My prescribing information=20=

really is the business of me and my patient and the pharmacist filling=20=

it." Drug companies spent $7.2 billion on marketing to physicians and=20
hospitals in 2006, and they have lobbied hard in Olympia against the=20
six-bill package aimed at limiting their efforts.

Lawmakers have enough doubts about the remaining bill, Senate Bill=20
6241, to put its passage in question.

"I don't think it's a substantive health care reform, and as an=20
attorney, I think it's probable that it would be struck down in a=20
federal court. In that sense, it becomes empty political theater," Rep.=20=

Brendan Williams, D-Olympia, said.

His concerns about the bill are the same points that the drug companies=20=

have made: that they have stalled similar laws in three New England=20
states by filing lawsuits, and that doctors already can ask for their=20
information not to be used.

"If you have an opportunity to opt out, why do you need the government=20=

to help you?" asked Cliff Webster, a lobbyist who represents=20
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

About 300 physicians in Washington have requested to be kept out of the=20=

marketing lists, according to the American Medical Association. There=20
are 27,000 people licensed to write prescriptions in the state.

The American Medical Association sells lists of doctor identification=20
numbers to information companies. Those companies also buy lists of=20
prescriptions from pharmacies, and with the two sets of information,=20
they can discover what an individual doctor has been prescribing =97=20
without patient names.

The association created the program that allows doctors to ask for=20
their information to be withheld, but its state chapter is not=20
satisfied.

The Washington State Medical Association supports the proposed ban on=20
data mining. Its officers told legislators that the opt-out program is=20=

not only unpopular but is based on a voluntary agreement: Drug=20
companies still get every doctor's history but agree not to give=20
certain histories to their salespeople.

The health care industry is one of the biggest spenders on lobbying.=20
Webster's firm, Carney Badley Smith Spellman, was the No. 1 spender=20
last year, with $3.8 million in salaries and expenses.

"It's a very, very tough battle, and I wouldn't anticipate if we win=20
it, we're going to win it overwhelmingly by any means," said Robby=20
Stern, the chairman of a group of more than 60 unions and health care=20
groups called the Healthy Washington Coalition. The group made the=20
"prescription privacy" bill, as it dubbed the measure, a priority this=20=

year.

The bill passed the Senate 26-22, with six Democrats joining the=20
Republicans to vote against it.

Stern said the Senate was more favorable territory than the House,=20
where the bill will have a hearing Monday.

[The Olympian]=