re: DOGE just got into Medicare and Medicare payments -

quote:

---

Blinded Medicare claims data is publicly avaialble to anyone if you really want it. You don't need patient identifiers to uncover potential red flags of abuse.

---

Cool, and wouldn’t we all feel better knowing that’s all Elon has access to?

quote:

---

sorry, I forget you are dumb. that was sarcasm. I thought putting “waste” in quotation marks would set that off.

---

Right, because I’m the one in here pissing my pants about something that can never and will never happen. I’m also losing my shite about a guy auditing an outrageously bloated and wasteful government agency, when he has literally built a fricking space program that is light years more efficient and about 10,000% cheaper than NASA. You’re a joke, friend. Quit while you’re behind.

quote:

---

The folks auditing them are far far far far more reviewed than the billing folks currently looking at your records

---

Removed or reviewed?

quote:

---

Removed or reviewed?

---

Are you trying to be cute?

Retard your government has given our data to contractors for years.

Same assholes have allowed breaches.

You are pissing your tampon over Elon exposing corruption and wasteful spending.

quote:

---

But if you have credible information a major health organization gives medical records to 3rs parties please let me know.

---

This happens all the time. And there’s no lawsuit there, trip-and-fall lawyer.

quote:

---

The Privacy Rule allows covered providers and health plans to disclose protected health information to these “business associates” if the providers or plans obtain satisfactory assurances that the business associate will use the information only for the purposes for which it was engaged by the covered entity, will safeguard the information from misuse, and will help the covered entity comply with some of the covered entity’s duties under the Privacy Rule. Covered entities may disclose protected health information to an entity in its role as a business associate only to help the covered entity carry out its health care functions – not for the business associate’s independent use or purposes, except as needed for the proper management and administration of the business associate.

---

LINK

quote:

---

I dont know what you’re trying to say.

---

What i'm "trying to say"?

Let's be clear. Okay?

It's my field.
So what I am saying is at one point, as a corporate owner, my company employed >250 billing personnel at any given time. I am keenly aware as to what their qualifications and requirements were. In our corporate terms, they were professionals. In DOGE terms, none would have made the first tranche of rejections.

quote:

---

If you know all that then you know that doesn’t mean they get full access to medical files. They get access to what they need to do their job.

---

Right. And that might include access to medical files. It certainly wouldn’t necessarily preclude access to medical files.

And no one seriously sees a KPMG employee walking into a UHC office and thinks “by god, I hope they have the appropriate access for their business associate purposes!!” The only reason you think that is because your arse is chapped over the election.

quote:

---

Right. And that might include access to medical files. It certainly wouldn’t necessarily preclude access to medical files.

---

to some. the whole point isn’t that it isn’t just open access.

quote:

---

And no one seriously sees a KPMG employee walking into a UHC office and thinks “by god, I hope they have the appropriate access for their business associate purposes!!”

---

You would hope the legal department thinks that as the law requires systems and protocols in place to make sure they only get what they need.

quote:

---

Still going strong after 13 pages but totally not mad at them finding the fraud

---

yeah man, it could be in mad about the things i keep ranting about.