Because there is a unanimous concept: the Sana’a with which the auditor pursues a specialist as if this was a plague is not understood. Why in the daily medical act is not clear specialist needs to prove that it is not a criminal, that each story is not a police Chronicle of a potential theft or an act irresponsible. Professor Roy Taylor addresses the importance of the matter here. is perhaps a personal motivation of some representatives of one Guild against another? It is a resentment free and built into the structure of the profession? Is it fostered from the cloisters? Is it pressed by institutions that have only an economic objective forgetting the vocation of service, delivery and quality care to the user? Is it true that there are specific guidelines for certain providers of health of glossing the greater possible amount of stories to dilate during months the payment of accounts? Legend has it that a missing EPS ordered glosar shaped aware and systematic 90% of medical histories for postponing the obligations and the worst thing is believe or assume that auditors doctors were provided for this. Why that recurrent suspicion? It is only by conceptual differences, or perhaps academic shortcomings? Do anything else that explain the reluctance of Auditors to accept the good faith of the specialist, that input trigger with the relevance of the criterion of the treating physician? Because otherwise, explains cases as not authorizing the attention of a child with severe dehydration with diarrhea or purulent tonsillitis feverish midnight not to consider it a matter of urgency, or a patient with dysmenorrhoea disabling in the morning by being a normal colic which does not warrant priority attention or deny a mammogram in a Lady of 46 years with two sisters with breast cancer by not finding relevance or glossing an a patient account operated for acute appendicitis, which resulted in laparatomia blank as a diagnostic error by lack of discretion or an urgent laparatomia made a patient who reported rupture of hemorrhagic follicle with a diagnosis of income of twisted cyst of ovary, not consistency of the diagnosis of income with the graduation, or pretend at all costs to send home a patient hospitalized for evisceration and surgical wound infectionon the grounds that it can be handling at home, to the inability of the surgeon treating and the anguish of the patient and his relatives.