This month, the Insights Association is dealing with new privacy legislation in more states, addressing more data tax problems, advocating for additional census funding, and making significant progress in efforts to improve California A.B. 2257.
The insights industry scored important legislative victories in the last month for pharmaceutical MR in Pennsylvania, data security in Utah, and more COVID-19 small business loans and grants at the federal level and in California. At the same time, we’re staring down lots of problematic legislation, including a new comprehensive data privacy law in Virginia and a complex excise tax on data collection in New York. Meanwhile, advocacy continues on issues like: California A.B. 2257; worrisome legislation in Congress that would allow for the unionization of research subjects; limitations on coronavirus-related exposure liability; the census; and restrictions on exit polling.
The Pennsylvania Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Prohibited Gifts Act (H.B. 593) includes an amendment recommended by the Insights Association that would protect bona fide marketing research with health care professionals.
August is normally quiet in Washington, DC, but in keeping with the theme of 2020, this month has been more frenetic. While we beat back new taxes on the insights industry, the Insights Association has had to tangle with the demise of the U.S.-EU Privacy Shield for data transfer, further pandemic relief, some new threats to pharma MR, the finalization of CCPA, and an attempt to rush the 2020 Census that threatens the statistical viability of most marketing research and data analytics in the U.S.
Marketing research and data analytics companies and departments that operate as business associates under HIPAA have a bit more leeway in handling disclosure of protected health information during the COVID-19 crisis if the data relates to public health
Adverse event reporting, with which some pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers require assistance from their marketing research and data analytics departments and partners/vendors, continues during the COVID-19 crisis.
Each time the state of Minnesota has tried to clarify treatment of respondent incentives for the participation of health care practitioners in marketing research sponsored by pharmaceutical manufacturers, companies still end up confused. What do the law, regulations and guidance tell us?
Philadelphia Rejects Bill That Would Have Banned Pharmaceutical Marketing Research with Healthcare Professionals
Legislation in the city of Philadelphia that would have cut off pharmaceutical marketing research with doctors was defeated in the city council yesterday.
As the state legislature considers a bill to prohibit most payments from the pharmaceutical industry to health care providers in connection with their participation in research, a new survey indicates the public health benefits of pharmaceutical marketing research studies of doctors.
Morris Whitcup and Keith LaMattina explore the wearable medical device market, in Alert! magazine