Comment by dmitriid
4 years ago
> to the point that the U.S. is a huge medical tourism destination.
Of course, if you have the money to fly to the US, stay in the US and pay out-of-pocket for a medical procedure in the US, then yes, the US is a good destination. Which translates into: if you're rich, medicine in the US is great.
However, not all of us are rich. And definitely not all Americans are rich.
Well that’s not the OPs value judgment at all is it?
Sifted goalposts
This:
> The average American pays more for healthcare over their live than the average European, and the outcomes are objectively worse.
remains true. No matter how you want to spin it and pretend that medical tourism affects this in any way.
Edit:
For 2015, https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/executive_briefings/c...
- Medical tourism to US: between 100k and 200k per year
- Medical tourism from US to other countries: 150k to 350k per year
Europe is ~500 million people
US is ~ 360 million people
Medical tourism is a drop in the bucket.
Your cite says that
>Americans cite cost savings as the most common reason to go abroad for health treatment, as medical procedures in foreign hospitals can cost thousands of dollars less than in the United States. This is especially true for those without health insurance—for an uninsured person, a knee replacement can cost $30,000 in the United States, compared to $12,000 in India. Many health travelers also go abroad for elective procedures such as cosmetic surgery that regular policies may not cover.
In other words, they largely go outside the US to save money on either cosmetic or routine procedures that, for one reason or other, US insurance won't cover.[1] Not same thing as the earlier discussion of rare or difficult conditions.
[1] Or they've chosen to not get health insurance. Post-Obamacare, this means that they are willingly paying the tax penalty for not having insurance. 91% of Americans have health insurance.
7 replies →