Tim, I agree that the number of Canadian people coming here for medical care is most likely small. After all Canada is a modern country and Iam sure the care is ok. Even when extreme care is needed most people are probably sure they are getting good care. When however it is Your child that is gravely ill, and a government run medical facility is telling You that They are doing all they can, and it is just not enough, a small percentage of people (I know of only one) will pack up the entire family, sell the business, and move some where where more can be done. For My friend that place was Massachusetts, and 20 years later He tells Me He knows He made the right move. Regards to the free Canadian health care his comment was "Well Charlie, You get what You pay for!" As You know, I am alll for extending health care to all individuals, but there is something in the countries' system that is worth preserving, and We had better be darn careful as to how We go about doing this!

Hi Tim. I'd like to add to this conversation, if I may.  My company, Health Travel Technologies, has developed a technology platform for major hospitals and facilitators serving the medical travel market.  Our largest client serves an average of 5 American patients per day.  I'd say about 30% of them have insurance, but the copays and dedcutibles are so high, they'd rather get their care with a top private Mexican hospital.  Prices are much cheaper, but the care is stellar, because top hospitals attract top surgeons. Hospital Angeles Tijuana, for example, features on its staff the gastroenterologist surgeon who perfomred the first ever LAP Band at UCLA medical center - - he has also worked as a proctor / teaching surgeon in more than 100 US hospitals.

So the quality of the care is certainly very compelling.

Let me just add, the latest patient to come to us asking for help getting care in Mexico - a young couple from Arizona who would like to have their baby in Mexico, so it will have dual citizenship.  The couple owns some property in Mexico and are thinking ahead to the time they may wish to retire to Mexico, mostly for health care price reasons.

I live 15 minutes from the Washington State border into Beautiful British Columbia.. Let me tell you that Canadians do complain about their health care system and want to improve upon it. None, zero, nada want the system we have here. That's probably why Canada's "father of Medicare," Tommy Douglas, the man who made it all happen, was voted "The Greatest Canadian" of all time.

http://www.cbc.ca/greatest/

P.S. I get my drugs from Surrey, British Columbia :)

Martin, that's why my brother in law lives in Canada and not the US.

We live our lives so worried about money and ownership of something that we think that "if is free or low cost, is not any good" or "we get what we pay for". I agree with those statements 100% when we are talking about tangible things but Health Care is not any kind of "product".
Although I totally understand that doctors, pharmaceutical companies, hospitals have to make a decent living, it is just here in US that any average Family practice doctor gets rich. I know, by my own experience, countless people that had to file for bankruptcy because were caught in serious health condition and thus unable to make money. We pay, no
matter what anyone can say, one of the most expensive health care in the planet. Being a Cancer survivor, and being under treatment inside and outside of US I would like to tell that people have Cancer anywhere and the surviving rates are not that different from Europe and here. My aunt had Cancer and was treated and remains in remission for absolutely no money in Portugal. But it is just not about cost that many people in US is complaining about, I have experienced, living in many states, very bad diagnostics in many different medical specialties. Also every doctor I go to, I feel like I am in a "drive-thru".
How many times we have to go back to the same doctor to treat (and pay for office visit) a simple cold? My sister had Flu and she went to see 2 different doctors and both gave the wrong diagnostic, and worst: one of them laughed and said the problem with her body aches and neck stiffness was because a bad mattress (which was brand new and recommended by her orthopedic doctor). Another one, a rheumatologist, made me come to his office 4 (FOUR)
times and charged my insurance 300 dollars each visit plus useless blood work for a simple crisis of gout. I ended up calling my uncle who lives abroad and he is a dentist and he gave the name of a good medication for that. And guess? he was right. I can spend hours and hours telling stories about doctors who take all your money to tell you that
you have a cold. Many people from US are travelling to India, Brazil and other countries for heart surgery, plastic surgery, etc. I wouldn't mind to pay more for a service if the service was good. We have to open our minds and don't get confused about modern hospitals, high tech tests and
good medicine. One thing there is nothing to do with the other. The lifespan in many European countries as well as in Asia are if not the same, higher than here and doctors don't have the same "rich life".
We see everybody in the other countries waiting in endless lines for a medical appointment. What could be sometimes true but is not a rule, and even in that case at least nobody owns thousands of dollars in medical bills. And in other countries health care isn't free, it is paid by the govern.
I guess everywhere will have problems with health care, in some way.

One of the most common objections we hear about medical travel is actually less an objection about the competence of foreign health care than an assertion about the presumed superiority of American health care.  Many American citizens subscribe to the (mostsly) benign and untested prejudice that our medical system has the checks and balances needed to protect patients from mistakes and incompetence.

"Face, it, I can never get the quality of care abroad that I can get here," confidently asserted my friend Joe, a lawyer who lives in Houston Texas.  I've heard some flavor of this comment at least a dozen times from other well-educated folks.

A new survey conducted by Massachusetts General Hospital and reported in the journal Annals of Internal Medicinen gives us good reason to question this presumption of 'safety in superiority'. The study found that, among 1,500 doctors, nearly half admitted to failing to report an incident of incompetence by a doctor colleague.   

So the system that has become exorbitantly expensive apparently isn't too good at self-regulating.  Another blow to the assumption that cost and quality are positively correlated - a notion debunked by another study reported on by the NY Times which you can read here (requires sign in to NY Times site).

What does this mean for the patient?  Certainly it is still very possible to obtain high quality medical care in the U.S.  What this study tells us (along with other information reported in this blog) is that getting health care in the U.S. is not a guarantee of the best, or even adequate care.  Combine this with the fact that, good or bad,  your U.S. health care is almost certain to the most expensive in the world, and you can see why the National Center for Policy Analysis  projects the medical travel industry to grow to  $100 billion by 2012.

These horror stories ( both mine and others) are not relevant. I could produce 1000 stories to Your one told by people Who love this country and the medical care They have received. None of these stories prove the U.S has good or bad health care. For the most part We have excellent care, the problem is more one of access than the quality of the care itself. We need to be very careful of what We put into place at this time.

It is true that the current crisis in the American health care system is one of access, and that access is roadblocked by cost. 50 million are uninsured, another 50 million underinsured, the number one reason for personal bankruptcy is medical bills. Most people who lose their jobs lose their health care within 1-6 months - forcing them to go to COBRA ($12k per year) or go to an independent plan that leaves them vulnerable to being dropped. 

Our system needs to provide greater access to quality, affordable care for all.  The role of insurance companies needs to be reconfigured.  Until these things happen, medical travel will bring free market dynamics to health care - proivding a quality, affordable option for people priced out of the US health care system.  Since these people already have no option, it's good that they have this one. Ideally, however, patients should be able to choose to go overseas for reasons of quality and prefrence, not because price concerns drive them to do so.

The House HELP Subcmte. hearing examining the merits of a single-payer

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/06/10/HP/R/19615/Single+Payer+Plan+Meets+Resistance+on+Capitol+Hill.aspx

I think I would be ready to accept a completely universal, one payer, govt. owned, mandated healthcare for all if We could at least for now keep the level of care I get. I think if all people had it we would not have a problem. I may not want such a thing but if it means the sick are covered then I'm on board.

Dr. David Gratzer tried to play the dark horse at the House HELP Subcmte. which held a hearing examining the merits of a single-payer health insurance. Suffice it to say, he failed. Rep. Dennis Kucinich gored him mercilessly. Mr. Gratzer is ideologue who views may be popular with a few in Canada, but not here. As such, Mr Gratzer is bound by disposition to accomplish acts of self-deception for the purpose of justification, obfuscation, and evasion in some sense or other to the advantage of his point of view.

Quebec's 'father of medicare,' Claude Castonguay, had his views receive a few moments attention today in the House HELP Subcmte. hearing on single-payer courtesy of Dr. Gratzer.

Mr. Castonguay's beliefs may have over-stated or misstated by Dr. Gratzer when he said that Mr. Castonguay wished to "stoke the fires of entrepreneurship," within the Canadian health care system.

Quebec's 'father of medicare' defends public system

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/1999/09/08/castonguay990908.html

Castonguay has some good ideas for fixing medicare

http://www2.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/editorial/story.html?id=0a48e656-d004-4227-8256-7a4e4304c13e&p=2

I'll be honest, I order a medication from abroad.  Why?  Our government refuses to authorize its sale here, yet use of said medication is a REQUIREMENT for the next step of treatment even with MEDICARE (go figure).  There's nothing wrong with the medication, it's been used safely internationally for years and is the preferred medication in many countries because unlike the medication that IS available here the medication our nation refuses to authorize doesn't cross the blood/brain barrier so it has many fewer side effects.  It's cheaper to buy from New Zealand than it would be to pay cash for a similar supply of the domestically available equivalent too. 

Most people I know of who come here are either too impatient to wait for their nation's system and rather well off (putting them in income categories similar to those who could pay cash to see doctors here) or their care is being paid for as a chairity thing like the children flown here for treatment of major deformities such as cleft palate.  I know more people who've flown abroad for treatment or at least ordered meds from abroad just to make what they so desperately needed affordable than I know people who came here for treatment.

So when can we steal our system back from the leaches who don't care about lives or quality of lives only about their profits?  Or at this point do we even have a system left to steal back?

Just to add a bit to going abroad for health care situation: I live less than an hour from the U.S./Mexico border. Since moving to this region I've met several people who get their healthcare or prescriptions in bordertowns such as Juarez. I actually went with a close friend who had dental work done in Las Palomas. Why? As a graduate student without healthcare, in order for him to afford having an infected tooth taken out we had to travel that far. He saved more than 50% of the costs expected at U.S. based dental offices--even including the gas it cost us to drive to the place. My friend--an employed, educated man with a relatively healthy lifestyle, couldn't afford to have a simple dental procedure done in the town where we lived.

I could tell you of the people I know who've been much worse off than him, but it only makes my heart hurt. Anyone who's frequented Bureau of Indian Affairs health care facilities or been in an emergency room in the Border Region can tell you hundreds of stories.

This is a problem that will continue to get worse unless proper healthcare reform goes into effect soon. The farce of how great medical attention is in the U.S. versus the rest of the world may have to do with level of income of the people perpetuating that myth. I think you'd get a different answer from the members of my family who've had to wait months for medical treatment because our tribal medical offices were unable to comply.

But, of course, the tribal medical offices aren't the medical offices people are always coming from abroad to use now are they?    

There is no argument that the health care system in this country is wounded.  Even physicians like me who oppose single-payer or goverment dominance over heatlh care admit this readily.  See www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com.  The controversy is how to heal the system.  Personally, I don't trust the government with this task. They are trying to ram through their program having no idea what it will cost or who will pay for it.  This strategy of 'shoot first' doesn't inspire much confidence. 

I agree that the government has an important role to play.  I am okay with governmental regulation on many aspects of health care.  I am very wary and suspicious, however, that the government running health care will achieve the reforms that we all seek.  I fear that the public option will become the only option.  We all know the 'disease', but I am skeptical that government is the cure.

Folks keep meantioning that they don't trust government - but stop for a minute and think - the 'govenment' is us. 

When I was in army basic my drill sergeant drilled our platoon that the U.S. in U.S. Army stood for US the people. So, I'll put my trust in US rather than profiteering insurance companies who are chasing the bottom line for their stockholders, and don't care a hoot about healthcare delivery.

We have to get profiteering insurance companies out of our health care. Also, whenever, I wanted or needed really good medical attention I've paided out of pocket - thankful for flex spending accounts.

Alana, in a perfect world I would like to trust the government too, where is your world? It sounds nice.

Alana, do you really believe that 'the government is us'?  I think what frustrates many of us is how much the government is not us.  Too often, it serves itself instead of serving us.  With regard to health care, we should aim for a system that strives for efficient and excellent medical care, which I am very skeptical that the government can accomplish.  Sure, the system is broken, but is government control the panacea we seek?  www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com

Michael and Charlie -  Since it is hard to read 'tone' in electronic comments, let me preface my remark by saying, this is an honest question asked in a neutral tone.  France and Canada have, by most accounts, done at least a reasonable, and by many measures quite good job providing a health care system that works for the vast majority of their respective populaces. Is it your belief that the US government is so inferior and/or corrupt we simply can't accomplish the same? Is there no possibility that any US administration can accomplish efficient and effective universal health care, or is the disease in the system of our government so broad and deep, the government simply has to be taken off the table as an option for solving the crisis in American health care?

I have difficulty with the assertion that our goverment can't do it because it hasn't been able to do it thus far. That is something of a tautology.  Surely our government today is not identical to 1963 or 1903 or 1783.  And yet that seems to be the argument from those who say "out government can't provide universal heath care".   What am I missing? If we can't trust the government, then how can we trust the free market? The current economic mess we're in - and that includes the insurance-and-health care debacle,  has everything to do with a deregulated free market running rampant.

And what world must a person be living in to have so little trust in the government that they can't trust the government to administer this or anything else?  Honestly, if the government can't be trusted at all, why is it still your government?  That sounds like reason enough to have left the country in search of a place where you'd feel more at home or to actively be pushing for reforms as is the whole purpose of sites like this one. 

And historically, the government of this nation is at least in theory "we the people".  Maybe not directly, and I'd certainly say they're doing a much better job of "we the corporations" right about now, but it's supposed to be "we the people" - and ALL OF US, not just rich ones or members of a certain religion or party, etc.  That we've let our parties and our pundits push our politics into such divisive and partisan rhetoric shows how far we've gone from what our nation is supposed to be and we've only ourselves to blame.

Also Sandra is quite right to ask, if we can't trust a government in which we ALL (at least all who vote) have an interest, how are we to trust an unfettered free market in which only a chosen few really have an interest? I've trust the government long before a free market.  I've seen what free markets will do in their unfettered pursuits of profits and while I'm far from a communist or even a true socialist, one thing I know is that unfettered free markets are not good for society and that markets must be at least somewhat regulated for the protection of the people and society.

The problem is not with the U.S government specifically. as government goes it is one of the best. Government is always incompetent. the higher the layer, the more incompetent. As an example note the response to Katrina. While state and local government argued with the federal government as to Who would do what and when the federal govt. would be allowed in, before the storm even hit Walmart and Home Depot were rushing generators, pumps, and other supplies to stores in the area. Ther is not one thing the govt. can do better than the private sector.

I think We just found something We can agree 100% on! Of course I would like to see Our military home much more!

Regards to corruption, I'm pretty sure both private and public sectors are staffed mostly by honest people. That is why it's news when They catch someone Who is not. Government is incompetent because They have no reason to be competent. If they waste a billion dollars on some stupid scheme, they just print more. Up until recently at least, if a private sector entity tried that They would lose it all. Which by the way, is how it is supposed to work.

Tim there was really no reason to repeat the typo I made (ther) just to make Me feel better. I'm not that sensitive. CR

I work for the government Myself, I am not saying there are many individuals Who are incompetent. (although I have met too many) It is the overall poorly assembled mess trying to do things that government was never meant to do. I also believe that only the tiniest percentage of private sector people are unethical. I have dealt with far too many ethical people to think crooks are the rule.

Danetta, actually the constitution is supposed to severely limit the power of government, and should only work to preserve individual liberty. What that role translates to be in practical terms should be determined by the people, preferablly by state referendum. Regards to your experiences with the private sector. I believe you. From what You have said in various comments, I believe You have had a rough go of it, and I guess such bad luck could color ones' opinion. I pray that now and in the future you meet the caliber of people I have had the good fortune to meet in the private sector.

Gallup poll

Have Ailments, Will Travel

Medical travel, categorized as inbound (from other countries to the U.S.) and outbound (to other countries from the U.S.), was originally a luxury afforded to the rich -- particularly those inbound to the United States and European countries for treatment at world-class facilities. Yet the increasing cost of medical care in the United States and large numbers of uninsured (at least 48 million people, according to the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured) may be making outbound travel an option worth considering.

Gallup finds that sizable proportions of Americans would "consider traveling outside the United States for treatment in a foreign country" for a variety of procedures and medical treatments. Twenty-nine percent of respondents would consider traveling out of the U.S. for alternative medical treatments for a major medical problem, and 24% would seek cancer diagnosis and treatment abroad. Americans are less likely to say they would consider traveling abroad for orthopedic procedures (15%), heart treatment (14%), or elective cosmetic surgery (10%).

Can't Pass Up a Good Bargain

The poll of 5,050 U.S. adults involved a split-sample experiment, in which one random half-sample was asked the "direct" question, reported above, on whether they would consider treatment abroad. The second half was asked whether they would consider treatment abroad, assuming "the quality was the same and the costs significantly cheaper." Given this additional phrasing, the percentage saying they would consider medical treatment outside U.S. borders increased by 12 percentage points, on average.

Given the cost of healthcare and health insurance in the United States, it's no surprise that people are turning to Medical Tourism as an affordable alternative.  As more and more people become uninsured due to the recession, getting medical treatment abroad may be the only solution.  There are reputable medical companies such as WorldMed Assist (www.worldmedassist.com) that are helping people to travel abroad as smoothly as possible.

Given the cost of healthcare and health insurance in the United States, it's no surprise that people are turning to Medical Tourism as an affordable alternative.  As more and more people become uninsured due to the recession, getting medical treatment abroad may be the only solution.  There are reputable medical companies such as WorldMed Assist (www.worldmedassist.com) that are helping people to travel abroad as smoothly as possible.

While it's easy to make some claims I'd like to see some factual data as to how many folks come the US, beyond the ilegals, for treatment vs how many US citizens go abroad.