User talk:SEBATIP

Pbm audit
Please do not add commercial links &mdash; or links to your own private websites &mdash; to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. See the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Hurricane111 19:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted the reference to our commercial link, but do state that the information in the article PBM audit is current, relevant and important to the business community. In it, the existence of new technology is acknowledged. This has potential to alter the viewpoint of many financial enterprises that depend on Pharmacy benefit managers to care for the needs of employees. The information contained is not readily known to many, even CPA firms, and as such, is valuable for providing new tools to audit benefits where error and abuse have been verified as more than minor in nature.

pbm audit
I don't believe that the material in the article "PBM Audit" deserves a "spam" designation. I believe that anyone at Wikipedia who knows something about what is being said and can add more information to it would be doing a valuable service to readers. For instance, the court cases that were referenced might be researched i.e., actions of several states, starting with Maine, that placed PBMs in a fiduciary role, are relevant. Information relating to actual audit findings are almost all confidential, but some information may be found on the Louisiana state govt. site.