While 27 visits in three years seems to be (IMO) an inordinate amount, its not terribly unusual if you consider Patsy to be a concerned parent wanting to make sure her childs ailments (no matter how small) are addressed. Its what those ailments might be that, in light of what happened to her eventually, cause anyone to question the reason for the visits. Beufs reaction simply adds more cause to question what was going on. The doctor/patient privilege does not trump a criminal investigation. A simple search into the issue resolves whether or not he had a right to refuse sharing that information with investigators in the death of one of his patients -- he did not.
By his records, he says the last time he saw her was sometime in November of 1996, and that was a checkup for a sinus infection. Prior to that in August of 1996 was a routine physical with a vaginal exam at which everything checked out as normal. So unless there is something else that the good doctor is not telling in this interview (which was done over the phone, BTW), there was up to a 5 month interval between his last routine vaginal exam and the time of her death. We dont know what would be included in what he calls a routine vaginal exam, but we know that the evidence of prior molestation doesnt indicate that it had been started 5 months prior to her death. Most of the experts (IIRC) who speculated about the timeframe suggested it was probably within 2 to 3 months at most, and that it had probably escalated leading up to the acute injuries inflicted just before her death.
As to Beufs assertion that you don't do a speculum exam on a child that young at least unless it's under anesthesia in answer to a question about finding an abrasion on her hymen, he is completely avoiding answering the question. A speculum is only used for examining the inside of the vagina, and it even provides access as far back as to the cervix for a Pap smear. Because of the location of the hymen at the outer entrance to the vagina, not only is a speculum not necessary -- it would partly cover the hymen preventing its examination, and it might possibly do damage to it by its use (actually, it would probably damage it, which is why any pediatrician would try to avoid using it unless absolutely necessary). But simply parting the labia minora is enough to expose the outer wall of the hymen where an abrasion would have occurred (and did on JonBenet).
So while I am still a little suspicious of Dr. Beuf and his cozy relationship with the Ramseys, without access to JonBenets records (including the doctors notes), and access to BRs records, we will never know anything more than we do already. All we have is speculation. And it's ridiculous the DA refused to get a court order for those records, and then allow police to just show up at his office demanding them. Then had he refused, they could have removed him from his office and denied him access until they could go through all his records looking for anything related to any of the Ramseys.