“I’m not so sure that a Massachusetts law would have much viability now,’’ said Dr. Lynda Young, president of the Massachusetts Medical Society. “We consider the sale of prescription data commercial activity, not free speech. It is an intrusion into the physician-patient relationship.’’
Two state senators, Mark Montigny from New Bedford and Richard Moore from Uxbridge, both Democrats, have repeatedly filed legislation to stop the commercial use of prescription data. They also expressed disappointment in the ruling but said it was not shocking given what they called a conservative, corporate leaning of the Supreme Court.
The decision also jeopardizes similar measures in Maine and New Hampshire. Legislators and other supporters of the laws see them as both protecting the privacy of patients and providing a tool to bring down medical costs, since they indirectly benefit makers of cheaper generic drugs.
Montigny, a founder and past president of the National Legislative Association on Prescription Drug Prices, said he and colleagues will decide how to proceed after attorneys have had an opportunity to digest the 53-page decision and examine whether they can rewrite the bill to satisfy the court’s concerns.
Leaders of pharmaceutical trade organizations praised the ruling, saying that access to doctors’ prescribing history helps drug companies educate physicians about new risks of particular medicines as well as newly approved uses.
“Information can most effectively be communicated if companies can determine which providers are prescribing which medicines,’’ said Josephine Martin, executive vice president of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, in a statement. “In the end, we want to make certain that doctors have the information they need to safely and effectively treat their patients.’’
