My reference?

Im afraid the subtlety is lost on my small brain David.
The house of reps submission is long.  Bruce Campbell is the S&N partner
presenting.  Im just going on what he said in that submission (seeing as
I know him I believe and trust him)

In either case its irrelevant.  I truly dont believe the motivation in
1996 prices or even now (that PCs are much cheaper) for supplying
computer hardware to a GP (and not wanting other download clients on it)
was "simply to cut the path firms delivery charges".

Of course its an inducement.

Do you think I can give out Ipods with onboard  audio presentations as a
learning tool?  Maybe I can...

JD

David de Bhal wrote:
> Just say a little bird told me.
> 
> If you look carefully at the reference given you might see some
> consideration of decisions made regarding the ordering of medical equipment
> with orders being faxed from the site of the meetings.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Behalf Of john dooley
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 9:54 PM
> To: General Practice Computing Group Talk
> Subject: Re: [GPCG_TALK] Increase in Pathology / Radiology ordering
> 
> David de Bhál wrote:
> 
> 
>>It was interesting that when Macquarie Pathology was accused of
>>inappropriate practice when distributing computers to GPs in NSW it was
>>simply a commercial decision that electronic distribution was cheaper than
>>courier-delivered reports.
>>
> 
> 
> David.  How do you know that?  Did the liason person for macquarie tell
> you that?
> 
> I seriously seriously doubt it was simply a commercial decision that
> electronic distribution was just cheaper even if you stuff a 2k computer
> in a practice and I seriously expect it related to an (apparent or
> hoped) incentive that putting in a PC would increase the use of that
> companies services for pathology referrals.  I note Macquarie were not
> happy to have their computer use any other download clients....
> 
> Were you on the inner with Macquarie at that time?
> 
> Also, a little googling revealed this gem from the house of reps where
> at least 1 company ;) was a bit irritated that another :D was doing just
> that with computers!  The things you find on the net hey....
> 
> (sorry im not big on tinyurl):
> http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:BpbNZjXWP4oJ:www.aph.gov.au/hansard/reps
> /commttee/r5762250.pdf+macquarie+pathology+inducements+HIC&hl=en&gl=au&ct=cl
> nk&cd=3
> 
> ...when is enough enough regarding "inducements" either to order more or
> send to one company? I wish I knew the answer to that one....  Is a
> collection license in a GP surgery going too far (generally accepted as
> no)?  Is a collection license/room rental in a group GP surgery at $/sqm
> twice the market rental rates too far (generally yes- certainly yes with
> the HIC and certainly prosecutable with $10-50k fines for both involved
> parties and I think even possibly a criminal conviction )..but what
> about 120% of market rates...(arguable?)
> 
> 
> JD
> nexus pathology
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gpcg_talk mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
> 


-- 
=================================================
dr john dooley mbbs frcpa

aka "ron"

_______________________________________________
Gpcg_talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk

Reply via email to