A closely watched trial gets under way Monday in federal court that will feature heated arguments over doctors’ prescribing patterns and patient information. And the outcome has implications for every consumer and physician, as well as drugmakers.

At issue - a New Hampshire state law that prevents data-mining companies such as IMS Health and Verispan from obtaining prescribing information from individual doctors. This is valuable stuff, because it’s sold to drugmakers that want to know about market share.

The state law was passed to prevent drug-company sales reps from pressuring or unduly influencing doctors to prescribe particular medicines, and protect patient privacy. IMS, however, argues the information provides more clarity about the best treatment decisions and that such laws restrict commercial free speech.

New Hampshire is a tiny market, of course, but consumer advocates are watching for signs that will embolden them to push for similar legislation elsewhere. IMS and Verispan, in fact, fear the law will catch on nationwide, which is why a loss for the companies is predicted to travel to the Supreme Court.

In other words, this philosophical struggle is just beginning. Both sides have a point. But is it possible for any court to play Solomon? More important, would that be good for society?

[tags]Free Speech, IMS Health, Patient Privacy, Verispan[/tags]