I would like to take a contrarian stance.  To me, HIPAA is only a problem 
to old line (closed source :-) vendors with a lot of legacy code.  In fact, 
HIPAA is written in a pretty rational and generous way.  I don't think it's 
such a big problem.
John


At 08:58 AM 1/13/02, you wrote:
>Suggest you ALL carefully, carefully read all the New HIPPA guidelines.
>Many will become effective as of October 2002.
>The Horse is ALREADY OUT OF THE BARN.
>
>There is a boiled down version available in print.
>Otherwise you can read the whole 50,000 pages at the .gov websites.
>
>The Guidelines affect everyone, the small solo practice up the BIG
>Megagroups, from the Cleaning Crew and Janitorial Staff to the CEO Owners of
>the Largest Group Practice and Hospitals.
>
>Falball
>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Received: from  rly-xc03.mx.aol.com (rly-xc03.mail.aol.com 
>[172.20.105.136]) by air-xc05.mail.aol.com (v82.22) with ESMTP id 
>MAILINXC55-0104221756; Fri, 04 Jan 2002 22:17:56 -0500
>Received: from  list.aafp.org ([208.35.133.7]) by rly-xc03.mx.aol.com 
>(v83.18) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXC39-0104221745; Fri, 04 Jan 2002 
>22:17:45 -0500
>Message-ID: 
><LYRIS-5798-8389-2002.01.04-21.06.25--Falball#[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 19:17:37 -0800 (PST)
>From: Debbie Heck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [practicemgt] RE: How can we allow the government to increase 
>their control of medicine EVEN MORE?
>To: "Practice Management Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>In-Reply-To: 
><LYRIS-5938-8387-2002.01.04-20.54.28--DocDebbee#[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Practice Management Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
>
>"The proverbial country doctor who deals only in paper...."
>Now WHAT doctor doesn't have a fax machine. It uses an
>electronic means of sorts to transmit information, though
>generally it starts and ends with paper. When I attended
>the TEPR conference in Boston last spring, I got the idea
>if you were in a small practice (and I wasn't sure of that
>definition) you were exempt from certain things. I left
>feeling like I wouldn't be "unduly" effected. I feel really
>stupid on this matter. There is so much of it that seems so
>contradictory. "Tell me your innermost secrets and then
>they will be safe with me" makes a lot less sense than not
>telling your secrets at all.
>
>Any education you can give us on this, please continue.
>
>Debbie
>
>--- Gregory Laurence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Those who believe that government control and access to
> > patient
> > information ......
>
>=====
>It's nice to be important but it's more important to be nice.
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
>http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to practicemgt as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to