IAAP (I am a physician, and a pathologist at that!). In TFA, she notes that the pathology was only marginally more informative by including electron microscopy and immunofluorescent study. I'm not sure what more she's expecting. There's a reason why medical school is 4 years, residency is 3-4 years, and fellowship is another 1-2 years (after 4 years of college for most US citizens). This stuff IS hard, and yes it actually does require a graduate degree. In this specific instance, should the bill explain that it's the standard of care to get EM and IF tests on medical kidney biopsies? Should the bill explain what those tests are? Maybe, but I've never seen a mechanic's bill that explained why part A was used and what that part is normally used for, or how often it's used/replaced. I've never seen any bill that really explained what stuff was for. It's going to be hard for most people to fully understand a medical bill, no matter how clear and un-obfuscated it is.
For medical billing, people are obviously more interested and vested in what's happening, but a lot of the times, the situation is going to be complicated. I don't know what the solution to that is, other than paying physicians for their time (instead of unnecessary procedures and tests) to explain things more clearly.