"public backlash against medical visitors"

Heads Up! Medical Tourism: Sometimes, Sightseeing is a Look at Your X-Rays
By JOSHUA KURLANTZICK
Published: May 27, 2007
New York Times 
 
This article, part of the NY Times, was a great starting place to learn about the background associated with medical tourism. The major points in the article were:

• The staff of the popular international medical facilities are mostly Western trained
• There are many amenities offered at these medical destinations, like yoga, restaurants, and sight-seeing
• 150,000 Americans go abroad each year for their health care needs
• Procedures abroad cost 60-80% less than they do in the US
• Some insurance companies are beginning to cover internationally offered services because this saves money for the company and the patient
• Hospitals that offer medical care to "tourists" now compete with each other in terms of who offers the best amenities at the lowest price
• There is some public backlash to medical tourists in poor countries like India and Thailand because the public clinics are understaffed while private facilities have the best staff

I think the most relevant point in this article is that these facilities offer not only excellent medical care, but also a safari or a visit to the Taj Mahal, 5-star accomodations, and an overall luxurious experience. I wonder if the competition to offer the best peripheral perks will eventually overshadow the emphasis on good health care? Also, as the hospitals try to out-do each other in terms of patient experience, will the costs increase to the point where the money saved is only a marginal concern?

Another important topic that this article addresses is the public out-cry in poor nations that are popular medical tourism destinations. The article only touches on the issue briefly, but just how intense is the backlash? Because the wealthier population can afford the private care, the dissatisfaction lies only with the poor, and they already have little bargaining power in these countries. Medical tourism, then, while fueling the economy, drives the health care industry even farther away from the needs of the poor; they are only very indirectly benefited by the increased money that an economic boost provides. The poor may not even experience the benefits for many more years (or generations!) to come...