>to massively disrupt the whole ball of wax is to make medical tourism as easy, intuitive, well-reviewed, and transparent as travel for other reasons.
well, considering how Google was hit for advertising Canadian pharmacies, you wouldn't want your medical tourism review/info startup be under US jurisdiction.
Like Mafia 60 years ago and US government during last 10 years, the medical industry may just happen to discover the benefits of such close, yet completely outside of US laws (or pretty much any laws that can't be worked around with money), location.
>Wasn't the issue they were knowingly advertising illegal goods, which happened to be what you wrote, but the important part was illegal?
i'm a little baffled by your statement. The same drug produced in another country - illegal to advertise/sell in the US. The same medical procedure performed in another country - do you think it is legal to advertise/sell it in the US? IANAL, lets suppose that it is technically legal right now. How fast the Congress can close that loophole once it starts threatening the health care industry profits
- bear in mind that there is the same really great "public interest" reason here of protecting public from dangers and side effects of services by low quality, cheap, cost cutting foreign quacks non-licensed by US medical board.
Foreign generics are illegal to import in the US because they violate patents held by US companies. Advertising an illegal import is one thing, but it's unclear how legal it would be to advertise something like "Come visit India where you can get generic Singulair while you're here!"
That said, dentists in Mexico aren't necessarily violating any US laws by doing business there, and you can't import dental work either.
Exactly. It's illegal to import those drugs. It's not illegal to go to another country to get treated.
I'm not a lawyer, and this isn't legal advice, but I'd imagine the only way they could stop you is by passing a new law, and it would be very controversial to try. Existing legislation (and stuff that can be done within the existing framework) is less controversial - bureaucrats and politicians will just say "it's the law, and I may not personally agree with it, but that's just the way things work". You can't say that if you are introducing a new law.
we know our govt lacks moral authority when a perfectly legitimate health care product, that just happens to be cheaper, is consider "illegal". i mean it's not like they were advertising magical horse testicles as a cure for male pattern baldness, purely on the claims of one Mr. Xaio Bo Tong, of China, who unfortunately cannot be reached for further comment at this time, etc.
well, considering how Google was hit for advertising Canadian pharmacies, you wouldn't want your medical tourism review/info startup be under US jurisdiction.