From: howdHol@yaooho.com   
      
   I had a video conference with my doctor to review my blood test after a   
   checkup, and at one point the connection started fuzzing out. I   
   suggested that we just switch to a phone call, and she said she couldn't   
   talk about my cholesterol, how much exercise I should get, and other   
   routine stuff over the phone because my insurance wouldn't cover it.   
      
   The fuzz stopped and after the conference ended, I checked and in fact   
   my state is moving to require expanded reimbursement for audio-only   
   calls but hasn't done it yet. It appears in the wake of the pandemic a   
   bunch of places in the US have moved in this direction:   
      
   https://mhealthintelligence.com/news/new-york-oks-telehealth-coverage-   
   for-audio-only-phone-services   
      
   https://tinyurl.com/y4owr7gm   
      
   Why would there be such an across the board problem with audio-only   
   conference reimbursement?   
      
   I can understand why regulators or insurers have insisted that some   
   services involve a video exam, but is there a reason why there would be   
   a reluctance for more routine consultations? Is it just bureaucratic   
   inertia, or is there some deeper reason?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)