First of all, Mr. Eichelman, I’m not asking for you to defend a law that says dental x-rays are Protected Health Information. I think we both know that it’s indefensible even before its costs and the inability of the HIPAA Act to safeguard PHI. As you and others in the HIT business have said to me more than once, “My job is to help dentists to be compliant with HIPAA. I make money, not law.”

Even if you would rather not discuss the Rule’s inability to add value to dental care, I think it is important for readers to know both sides of the story. Accurate news about the absurdity both you and I recognize is not well known. Not yet. And if dentists are provided the balanced information they deserve from stakeholders, some may elect to abandon computerization rather than subject their practices to HHS inspections. It would be more ethical to provide dentists the whole story.

Does enforcement of HIPAA regulations cost money? You bet. Is it worth it? I say no child in America should go to bed with a toothache because of the expense of absurdity.

For Mr. Hatch, I ask why medical histories must be included in dental information outside a dentist’s practice. Without attached medical information, dental information is worthless to everyone except the patient’s dentist and possibly those who might just conduct open-source evidence-based dental research -without a worry from HIPAA.

We shouldn’t let the HHS stand in the way of progress.

D. Kellus Pruitt DDS

You are absolutely entitled to your opinion. I only hope you understand that others are entitled to their opinion as well. I was attempting to answer a question in direct relation to the original article.

I’m encouraged that you’re willing to question the need for security, but to ask me to provide absolute proof to disway any and all questions you have is a bit much. I am not the absolute authority that makes the rules. I am only attempting to protect business and personal information from data breaches that can have lasting negative effects. If you doubt these events occur, I can only point you to your favorite search engine for a bit of a proof.

As for anything the HHS Secretary has or has not said, I’m unclear how that has anything to do with me, but I also have no interest in a protracted argument of medical/dental business policy. Again, I don’t set the rules or even have a say. I think you’ve mistaken my answers to pointed questions for some type of activist agenda.

As I said in the beginning, you are absolutely entitled to your opinion.

First of all, Mr. Eichelman, I think it is wonderful that you and I are having this unprecedented and transparent conversation about digital dental records, and I appreciate your patience with me. It is my opinion that there is a lot of misinformation on the Internet about what data is important to safeguard and what is not. I say nobody cares about dental information, yet you defend its security because of what I must call an imaginative domino theory.

And then again, does it even matter that we worry about security at all? A few weeks ago, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius came up with the idea that a data breach from a dental office doesn’t have to be reported if the doctor doesn’t think it will cause anyone any harm.

Where is the front line, Mr. Eichelman?

A bit far-fetched? Not really. There were several cases of this occurring on large scales over the past two-three years. As a business owner (which I am) of any type, I wouldn’t want my business to the be source of information that started the breach of privacy for my clients/customers.

Where are the wrong hands? Nobody cares what is in dental records other than the patient and the dentist. Why make life so complicated?

D. Kellus Pruitt DDS