One of the world’s most respected journals, The Economist, suggests this week that Medical Tourism is the proverbial tide that lifts all boats. In an article headlined “Importing Competition,” the magazine says the “coming boom in medical travel could help both rich and poor.”

By “rich,” they mean the United States and the developed economies of the west — not wealthy individuals. By “poor,” they mean the Latin American, Asian, Eastern European and African countries that are becoming medical tourism destinations.

The argument in “poor” countries against medical tourism is that providing private medical infrastructure for foreign patients will divert resources from improving health care locally. But The Economist asserts:

But the private sector cannot be blamed for the failings of state-run health bureaucracies in developing countries, which neglected the poor long before medical tourists arrived. And the foreigners’ arrival could improve things in developing countries, for the poor as well as the rich. Although the hospitals that cater to medical tourists will of course employ local staff, they will also create jobs, tempt home émigré doctors and nurses, encourage locals to train as medics, spread know-how and treat local people.

An argument against medical tourism from the point of view of the “rich” is that the United States (for example) needs to focus on cutting costs and improving efficiency of its own healthcare system rather than having patients go overseas. The Economist suggests that medical tourism is part of the solution, not part of the problem:

Read the rest of this entry »

The National Center for Policy Analysis, in an article released today, concludes that “as more insured patients begin to travel abroad for low-cost medical procedures, medical tourism will result in sorely needed competition in the American health care industry.”

The NCPA is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy research organization with a goal of developing and promoting private alternatives to government regulation and control. The latest analysis was prepared by Devon Herrick, who also authored a lengthier study of medical tourism and travel in Nov. 2007 titled Medical Tourism: Global Competition in Health Care.

The latest analysis recommends direct public policy changes at the state and federal level:

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve been told time and time again that medical travel and tourism is under discussion at the highest policy-making levels of the U.S. government and have not doubted the assertion when I have heard it. Yet last week, I was briefly stumped when someone asked me for proof that medical tourism is important enough for Congress and the White House to be interested.

I pointed at hearings conducted by the United States Senate Special Committee on Aging in June 2006:

The Globalization of Health Care: Can Medical Tourism Reduce Health Care Costs?

… but my cynical correspondent pointed out that U.S. Senate committees conduct hearings all the time, perpetually gathering testimony on all manner of issues that they promptly forget about; and indeed, I had to acknowledge that there is to date no public sign of a government task force on medical tourism or any type of follow-up. The leadership of the Senate changed in late 2006 and committee staff has changed as well.

So I did a little more digging to back up my point and found that U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt has a very public curiosity about medical tourism and travel, and even discussed it on his own blog, as recently as April, after a trip to the Far East that included a stopover in Singapore. Of Singapore’s healthcare system, Leavitt had this to say:

“So, what about the quality you say? Aside from the statistics on life expectancy already cited, let me suggest we think about this. The Government of Singapore estimates that, in 2008, over 600,000 people, including many Americans, will engage in medical tourism. They will fly to Singapore to get their care at a fraction of the price. The Singaporean Government believes by 2012 the number will exceed a 1,000,000 people a year. In order to attract these people, they are transparent with both cost and quality outcomes. Patients have more information about care in Singapore than about care they would get from their local hospital. Hmmmm.”

Hmmmm, indeed.

During a trip to India in January, Leavitt blogged:

Read the rest of this entry »