Florida seeks patient prescription data
Florida's insurance regulator is demanding detailed prescription data on millions of patients, raising alarms over patient privacy.
In January, the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation asked pharmacy benefit managers -- companies that manage prescription drug plans -- to hand over highly personal data about prescriptions filled in the state last year.
The data request includes the patients' full names and dates of birth, names of medications filled and doctors they've seen.
It's unclear why the state wants these details. In a letter to one benefit manager reviewed by The New York Times, the regulator said Florida needed to check whether pharmacy benefit managers are following a 2023 state law that aimed to lower drug prices.
But employers and others say the request could expose highly sensitive health data to misuse.
"You don't need such granular patient information for purposes of oversight," Sharona Hoffman, a health law and privacy expert at Case Western Reserve University, told The Times.
"You have to worry: Is the government actually trying to get information about reproductive care or transgender care or mental health care?" she added.
The data demand comes at a time when Florida has passed strict laws restricting abortion access and transgender care.
These laws require that doctors dispense abortion pills in person and limit access to gender-affirming care for minors.
Florida's data request could, in theory, be used to check whether doctors are following these laws -- although the state has not said whether that's the reason, The Times reported.
The American Benefits Council, which represents 430 large employers and service organizations, said the request "violates the health privacy and security of millions of Floridians," and that the state had failed to clearly outline its authority or reasons for the action.
"We have a duty to employees and their data," Katy Johnson, the president of the council, said in an interview.
Shiloh Elliott, a spokeswoman for the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation, said the objections "are clearly from those who do not want to be regulated or have any oversight in their industry." She added that the office "will continue to request data in the best interest to protect consumers."
Elliott added that concerns "should be addressed to the actual health care insurance companies that have had countless data breaches exposing millions of Americans' sensitive information."
Experts say Florida already has access to prescription data for Medicaid patients, but that data is usually tightly restricted to staff who need it.
Joseph Shields, president of Transparency-Rx, a trade group for smaller benefit managers, called Florida's request "pretty expansive and unprecedented."
Rosa Novo, benefits director for Miami-Dade County Public Schools, which provides health insurance to about 45,000 people, told The Times she supports efforts to reduce drug prices -- but not at the expense of their privacy.
"My doctor is the only one who should know that," Novo said.
More information
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has more on the HIPAA Privacy Rule.
Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NIH scientists condemn Trump research cuts
Hundreds of staffers from across the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are speaking out against the politicization of their research and termination of their work while demanding that the drastic changes made at the agency be walked back. In a letter addressed to NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya, more than 2,000 signatories stated, 'we dissent to Administration policies that undermine the NIH mission, waste public resources, and harm the health of Americans and people across the globe.' The letter was titled 'The Bethesda Declaration' in reference to where NIH's campus is located. The signatories cited Bhattacharya's stated commitment to academic freedom that he made in April and called on him to push back against the changes Trump administration has implemented at NIH under his leadership. 'Academic freedom should not be applied selectively based on political ideology. To achieve political aims, NIH has targeted multiple universities with indiscriminate grant terminations, payment freezes for ongoing research, and blanket holds on awards regardless of the quality, progress, or impact of the science,' they wrote. They pointed to U.S. law and prior research that has shown that the participation of diverse populations in studies is necessary for NIH's work. The NIH staffers further blasted the canceling of nearly completed studies. 'Ending a $5 million research study when it is 80% complete does not save $1 million, it wastes $4 million,' they wrote. The researchers called on Bhattacharya to restore foreign collaborations with the global scientific community, put independent peer reviews back in place, bring back terminated NIH staffers and rethink the 15 percent cap on indirect study costs that the Trump administration enacted. 'Combined, these actions have resulted in an unprecedented reduction in NIH spending that does not reflect efficiency but rather a dramatic reduction in life-saving research,' they stated. 'Some may use the false impression that NIH funding is not needed to justify the draconian cuts proposed in the President's Budget. This spending slowdown reflects a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally-appropriated funds for critical NIH research.' NIH research is not solely centered in Bethesda. The agency is responsible for funding research projects across the country and abroad. Numerous lawsuits have been filed to combat the pulling back of billions of dollars in NIH funding. Last week, a federal judge allowed a suit filed by university researchers and public health groups challenging the cuts to move forward. Bhattacharya responded to the letter on the social media platform X. 'We all want @NIH to succeed and I believe that dissent in science is productive. However, the Bethesda Declaration has some fundamental misconceptions about the policy directions NIH has taken in recent months,' he wrote. Bhattacharya said the actions taken at NIH have been to 'remove ideological influence from science' and further argued the agency hasn't halted international scientific collaboration but is instead 'ensuring accountability.' 'Claims that NIH is undermining peer review are misunderstood. We're expanding access to publishing while strengthening transparency, rigor, and reproducibility in NIH-funded research,' he wrote. 'Lastly, we are reviewing each termination case carefully and some individuals have already been reinstated. As NIH priorities evolve, so must our staffing to stay mission-focused and responsibly manage taxpayer dollars.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Universal Health Services (UHS) Shares Are Trading Lower Today
Shares of hospital management company Universal Health Services (NYSE:UHS) fell 5.7% in the afternoon session after Chief Financial Officer Steve Filton noted during a recent conference that procedural volumes (an important driver of hospital revenue) "have been slower to recover back to historical levels than we might have imagined." Filton also voiced concern over the Trump administration's proposed federal spending bill, particularly its implications for healthcare funding. Since UHS derives a significant portion of its revenue from government programs like Medicare and Medicaid, the anticipated cuts to Medicaid could significantly affect the company, especially in regions with high dependency on public healthcare funding. The shares closed the day at $177.76, down 6.2% from previous close. The stock market overreacts to news, and big price drops can present good opportunities to buy high-quality stocks. Is now the time to buy Universal Health Services? Access our full analysis report here, it's free. Universal Health Services's shares are not very volatile and have only had 8 moves greater than 5% over the last year. In that context, today's move indicates the market considers this news meaningful, although it might not be something that would fundamentally change its perception of the business. The previous big move we wrote about was 28 days ago when the stock gained 5.9% after the major indices popped (Nasdaq +3.4%, S&P 500 +2.5%) in response to the positive outcome of U.S.-China trade negotiations, as both sides agreed to pause some tariffs for 90 days, signaling a potential turning point in ongoing tensions. This rollback cuts U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods to 30% and Chinese tariffs on U.S. imports to 10%, giving companies breathing room to reset inventories and supply chains. However, President Trump clarified that tariffs could go "substantially higher" if a full deal with China wasn't reached during the 90-day pause, but not all the way back to the previous levels. Still, the agreement has cooled fears of a prolonged trade war, helping stabilize expectations for global growth and trade flows and fueling renewed optimism. The optimism appeared concentrated in key trade-sensitive sectors, particularly technology, retail, and industrials, as lower tariffs reduce cost pressures and restore cross-border demand. Universal Health Services is down 1.1% since the beginning of the year, and at $177.77 per share, it is trading 26.4% below its 52-week high of $241.52 from September 2024. Investors who bought $1,000 worth of Universal Health Services's shares 5 years ago would now be looking at an investment worth $1,628. Unless you've been living under a rock, it should be obvious by now that generative AI is going to have a huge impact on how large corporations do business. While Nvidia and AMD are trading close to all-time highs, we prefer a lesser-known (but still profitable) semiconductor stock benefiting from the rise of AI. Click here to access our free report on our favorite semiconductor growth story. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
In letter, more than 300 scientists rebuke Trump research cuts, NIH director
June 9 (UPI) -- Hundreds of scientists via the National Institute of Health signed a published letter in protest to NIH leadership and recent cuts by the Trump administration. "We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political moment over human safety and faithful stewardship of public resources," more than 300 scientists wrote Monday to NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya in a so-called "Bethesda Declaration" published by Stand Up For Science in rebuke to Trump administration research funding cuts and staff layoffs. They added in the letter to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of Congress overseeing NIH that they "dissent" to Trump's policies that "undermine" the NIH mission, "waste" public resources and harm "the health of Americans and people across the globe." In the open letter, they said the current endeavor to "Make America Healthy Again" referred to "some undefined time in the past." "Keeping NIH at the forefront of biomedical research requires our stalwart commitment to continuous improvement," the letter's writers said, adding that the life-and-death nature of NIH work "demands that changes be thoughtful and vetted." According to the letter, the Trump administration terminated at least 2,100 NIH research grants since January, totaling around $9.5 billion and contracts representing some $2.6 billion in new research. "We urge you as NIH Director to restore grants delayed or terminated for political reasons so that life-saving science can continue," the letter added in part. "This undercuts long-standing NIH policies designed to maximize return on investment by working with grantees to address concerns and complete studies," it said. It further accused the White House of creating a "culture of fear and suppression" among NIH researchers. Bhattacharya, a Stanford University professor and health researcher, called the agency the "crown jewel of American biomedical sciences" and said he had the "utmost respect" for its scientists and mission during his confirmation hearing in March. On Tuesday, Bhattacharya is scheduled to testify before the Senate's Appropriations Committee on Trump's 2026 NIH budget proposal which seeks to cut roughly 40% of NIH's $48 billion budget. "This spending slowdown reflects a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally-appropriated funds for critical NIH research," the scientists penned to Bhattacharya. The letter goes on to characterize it as "dissent" from Trump administration policy, quoting Bhattacharya during his confirmation as saying "dissent is the very essence of science." "Standing up in this way is a risk, but I am much more worried about the risks of not speaking up," says Jenna Norton, a program officer at the NIH's National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. "If we don't speak up, we allow continued harm to research participants and public health in America and across the globe," Norton said in a statement, adding that if others don't speak up, "we allow our government to curtail free speech, a fundamental American value."
