Thai Commerce Min will press charges against hospital operators overcharging foreigners

[xylophone]

I just last week signed up for the check-up at Pattaya International Hospital on Soi 4. Blood work, chest X-ray, EKG, eye, audio, and dental exams, etc.

Total price was 6300 THB, plus another 1,000 THB for a consultation with a cardiologist which I requested to examine and explain an anomaly seen in the EKG. All of the staff were patient and informative about the process and results. Not the slightest pressure to go for more tests, medications, or procedures.

Took about 3 hours in the AM, and another 2 hours in the late afternoon after the blood work testing was completed.

My wife had a similar check-up the same day, and her experience mirrored mine.

They even gave each of us a 100 THB coupon for lunch at a restaurant across the street.

The test packages offered by hospitals are in fact highly questionable. they are in most cases just a way of making quick cash.

The whole concept of persuading a patient that taking an "MoT" type package of tests has any real value is hotly debated and goes against basic principles of treating a patient as an individual.

We humans are NOT machines - every patient is different - even in things like blood temperatue and pressure and applying uniform tests are not considered to be an effective way of treating most patients

Whenever I go back to NZ, my doctor insists on doing "blood work" on me and I have no problem with that.

Over here, hospitals advertise the tests and no one is "persuaded" to take them, it's a matter of choice.

Of course we are all individuals, however some things do remain the same as regards to "ranges" of BP, cholesterol, liver and kidney function tests etc, so always nice to know that you are within the ranges, and if you are outside of them, reasons why can be investigated and hopefully rectified.

As for………“applying uniform tests are not considered to be an effective way of treating most patients”, well they are not being treated, their blood work etc is being measured against a set of parameters which generally apply to the population, and if they are outside of these parameters then the treatment, if necessary, can begin.

It appears you are unfamiliar with the "powers of persuasion" used by commerce on the general public - which is unfortunate because you are also clearly subject to them...presumably you are unaware of this.

As for your concept of parameters and their interpretation...yet another field you are uninformed about....

I would like to bow to your superior knowledge as "the great informed one", however I can't, I'm afraid because, health screening is recommended around the world by health authorities and is seen to be a useful tool in combating sickness and disease, for example..........

"In many countries there are population-based screening programmes. In some countries, such as the UK, these operate at a national level. Common screening programmes include:

· Cancer screening

· Pap smear or liquid-based cytology to detect potentially precancerous lesions and prevent cervical cancer

· Mammography to detect breast cancer

· Colonoscopy and fecal occult blood test to detect colorectal cancer

· Dermatological check to detect melanoma

· PPD test to screen for exposure to tuberculosis

· Beck Depression Inventory to screen for depression

· SPAI-B, the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale and Social Phobia Inventory to screen for social anxiety disorder

· Alpha-fetoprotein, blood tests and ultrasound scans for pregnant women to detect fetal abnormalities

· Bitewing radiographs to screen for interproximal dental caries

· Ophthalmoscopy or digital photography and image grading for diabetic retinopathy

· Ultrasound scan for abdominal aortic aneurysm

· Screening of potential sperm bank donors

· Screening for metabolic syndrome

· Screening for potential hearing loss in newborns".

And from the UK............ "There are many methods for prevention of disease. It is recommended that adults and children aim to visit their doctor for regular check-ups, even if they feel healthy, to perform disease screening, identify risk factors for disease, discuss tips for a healthy and balanced lifestyle, stay up to date with immunizations and boosters, and maintain a good relationship with a healthcare provider"

It seems strange that you are so uninformed about this especially as the health services in many countries have been advocating annual checkups for various screenings such as prostate, cervical cancer, colon and many more.

So I don't need "persuading" to have my annual checkups (sorry to have to inform you that I wasn't persuaded) and obviously in your view health authorities around the world have it wrong with their advice to get regular screening, so why don't you "persuade them" to do otherwise.

[LPCustom69]

You seem totally clueless about healthcare in America, Cumgranosalum.

Edited May 16, 2015 by LPCustom69

[cumgranosalum]

You seem totally clueless about healthcare in America, Cumgranosalum.

would you care to expand on that?

[cumgranosalum]

Total price was 6300 THB, plus another 1,000 THB for a consultation with a cardiologist which I requested to examine and explain an anomaly seen in the EKG. All of the staff were patient and informative about the process and results. Not the slightest pressure to go for more tests, medications, or procedures.

Took about 3 hours in the AM, and another 2 hours in the late afternoon after the blood work testing was completed.

My wife had a similar check-up the same day, and her experience mirrored mine.

They even gave each of us a 100 THB coupon for lunch at a restaurant across the street.

The test packages offered by hospitals are in fact highly questionable. they are in most cases just a way of making quick cash.

The whole concept of persuading a patient that taking an "MoT" type package of tests has any real value is hotly debated and goes against basic principles of treating a patient as an individual.

We humans are NOT machines - every patient is different - even in things like blood temperatue and pressure and applying uniform tests are not considered to be an effective way of treating most patients

Whenever I go back to NZ, my doctor insists on doing "blood work" on me and I have no problem with that.

Over here, hospitals advertise the tests and no one is "persuaded" to take them, it's a matter of choice.

Of course we are all individuals, however some things do remain the same as regards to "ranges" of BP, cholesterol, liver and kidney function tests etc, so always nice to know that you are within the ranges, and if you are outside of them, reasons why can be investigated and hopefully rectified.

As for………“applying uniform tests are not considered to be an effective way of treating most patients”, well they are not being treated, their blood work etc is being measured against a set of parameters which generally apply to the population, and if they are outside of these parameters then the treatment, if necessary, can begin.

It appears you are unfamiliar with the "powers of persuasion" used by commerce on the general public - which is unfortunate because you are also clearly subject to them...presumably you are unaware of this.

As for your concept of parameters and their interpretation...yet another field you are uninformed about....

I would like to bow to your superior knowledge as "the great informed one", however I can't, I'm afraid because, health screening is recommended around the world by health authorities and is seen to be a useful tool in combating sickness and disease, for example..........

"In many countries there are population-based screening programmes. In some countries, such as the UK, these operate at a national level. Common screening programmes include:

· Cancer screening

· Pap smear or liquid-based cytology to detect potentially precancerous lesions and prevent cervical cancer

· Mammography to detect breast cancer

· Colonoscopy and fecal occult blood test to detect colorectal cancer

· Dermatological check to detect melanoma

· PPD test to screen for exposure to tuberculosis

· Beck Depression Inventory to screen for depression

· SPAI-B, the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale and Social Phobia Inventory to screen for social anxiety disorder

· Alpha-fetoprotein, blood tests and ultrasound scans for pregnant women to detect fetal abnormalities

· Bitewing radiographs to screen for interproximal dental caries

· Ophthalmoscopy or digital photography and image grading for diabetic retinopathy

· Ultrasound scan for abdominal aortic aneurysm

· Screening of potential sperm bank donors

· Screening for metabolic syndrome

· Screening for potential hearing loss in newborns".

And from the UK............ "There are many methods for prevention of disease. It is recommended that adults and children aim to visit their doctor for regular check-ups, even if they feel healthy, to perform disease screening, identify risk factors for disease, discuss tips for a healthy and balanced lifestyle, stay up to date with immunizations and boosters, and maintain a good relationship with a healthcare provider"

It seems strange that you are so uninformed about this especially as the health services in many countries have been advocating annual checkups for various screenings such as prostate, cervical cancer, colon and many more.

So I don't need "persuading" to have my annual checkups (sorry to have to inform you that I wasn't persuaded) and obviously in your view health authorities around the world have it wrong with their advice to get regular screening, so why don't you "persuade them" to do otherwise.

You don't seem to understand that national screening and "test packages" are not the same thing.

Edited May 17, 2015 by cumgranosalum

[cumgranosalum]

Testing Packages -and “fear-mongering”. How hospitals can make a quick buck from “testing” packages

There seems to be some doubts how hospitals and healthcare establishments can persuade or influence customers in through the door....especially by offering "test packages"

Many hospitals have found they can make a quick buck by offering test packages at a “discount price” - these are snapped up by gullible customers who think that they are some kind of “MoT” (roadworthy certificate) that will set them up for the next year or so.

Unlike screening which is aimed at particular groups (at risk) within a population these tests are aimed at anyone who can be persuaded to walk through the door....there benefits are at best nebulous and don’t demonstrate any usefulness in general levels of health.

This is a highly misleading practice and possibly quite unethical.

Private hospitals in particular over the last decade have aggressively marketed Thailand as a “hub” for medical tourism and this is linked to expat healthcare too.

Couple this with inadequate management, monitoring and evaluation necessary for good governance and lack of regulation of the corporate health care business sector and you have a recipe for poor ethics and overcharging.

“At present, many people rather effusively gush: 'Doctor, give me the works, I want a full check-up!' Many clinics now readily pander to this demand by providing a wide range of 'executive health check-up schemes,' but often these 'schemes' can be more harmful than beneficial !” - http://www.thebestmedicalcare.com

“Often, patients seem to fall into two extreme categories: those who get no routine medical care and those who excess medical care including screening tests, even though they do not really 'need' them. Periodic tests and examinations should not become routine or part of a standard 'one-size-fits-all' package. In order to be really effective, they need to be tailored according to a person's age, sex , family history and personal risk factors. Unfortunately, due to the widespread fallacy that the human body is no better than a machine, we have been taught that the body needs 'routine maintenance' which should be performed by a doctor, much as your mechanic tunes up your car periodically. However, medical experts have debunked such an analogy as being a gross oversimplification. They have emphatically stated that screenings and early detection are not a universal panacea to ward off all ills. “ - http://www.thebestmedicalcare.com

“Public Citizen Criticizes Hospitals Of ‘Fear Mongering' To Market Expensive Medical Testing”

http://www.medicaldaily.com/public-citizen-criticizes-hospitals-fear-mongering-market-expensive-medical-testing-289048

This article shows how this sort of campaign is operated in the US - it would be unlikely that this money spinner has gone unnoticed by the Thai medical industry.......

“Consumer watchdog Public Citizen accused 20 hospitals and health systems across the United States of “fear mongering” to upsell patients on expensive medical tests. Public Citizen says low-cost health screenings advertised by hospitals often lead to more expensive — and even riskier — exams in a classic bait-and-switch. Health screenings beneficial for some patients should not be marketed as necessary testing to the general public, the group said in a press statement. Specifically, the group requested that hospitals end sponsorships with HealthFair, a provider of medical screenings conducted in vans specially outfitted as mobile clinics.............”

“....................."That $179 may seem like a bargain, but zero dollars would be the real bargain," Carome told USA Today. "You don't need to spend any money on these tests unless you fit into a very narrow population, and no one needs to be screened with six at once."”

Consumer watchdog Public Citizen accused 20 hospitals and health systems across the United States of “fear mongering” to upsell patients on expensive medical tests. Public Citizen says low-cost health screenings advertised by hospitals often lead to more expensive — and even riskier — exams in a classic bait-and-switch. Health screenings beneficial for some patients should not be marketed as necessary testing to the general public, the group said in a press statement. Specifically, the group requested that hospitals end sponsorships with HealthFair, a provider of medical screenings conducted in vans specially outfitted as mobile clinics."

Edited May 17, 2015 by cumgranosalum

[xylophone]

Quote cumgranosalum; “You don't seem to understand that national screening and "test packages" are not the same thing”. And, “Unlike screening which is aimed at particular groups (at risk) within a population”

They may not be the same thing, however they certainly overlap in many cases (as is evidenced in one of your links) and they can fulfil a criterion with regards to the "particular groups (at risk) within a population". This particularly when it is suggested that people of my age have annual check-ups which cover prostate and colon, and as I do enjoy a drink or two why shouldn't I have liver and kidney function tests? I'm sure that many posters on TV find themselves in the same situation.

So I consider I am at one of the "at risk groups" and I go for annual check-ups even if I feel healthy, and that includes blood work, as recommended by my well-respected doctor and surgeon back home.

Furthermore your lengthy self-penned post and reproduction of other articles does miss one vital point (several actually) as regards the so-called "advertising to persuade people", especially here in Thailand, because what you see in the hospitals here is not persuasive advertising in any way, shape or form, it is a promotional offer and often poorly presented at that, because it says nothing about the benefits to the consumer, how it will make them feel, and how their life will be better by undertaking this particular promotion, and it usually has no, or a very poor, call to action.

So it does not represent "persuasive advertising" and it is down to the consumer to decide, and even in your own lengthy railing against such practices the following is mentioned: –

“At present, many people rather effusively gush: 'Doctor, give me the works, I want a full check-up!' Many clinics now readily pander to this demand by providing a wide range of 'executive health check-up schemes,' ………

So consumer demand has ensured that many clinics now readily pander to this, so what?

I'm sure a friend of mine who had one of these tests and found that his haematocrit reading was low and he was bleeding internally was very grateful for that finding, as was a lady friend of his who was diagnosed with TB.

And for the record, it would be nice for other posters if you would exercise some "interpersonal skills" when replying to posts rather than calling posters "uninformed" or "ill informed" or that they simply "don't understand", and the following response by you is downright rude, " It appears you are unfamiliar with the "powers of persuasion" used by commerce on the general public - which is unfortunate because you are also clearly subject to them...presumably you are unaware of this.

As for your concept of parameters and their interpretation...yet another field you are uninformed about”...

I noticed there has been feedback of this ilk on another thread so perhaps you would like to rein in your "arrogance and superior attitude" for the benefit of all concerned.

And to show that you can be just as wrong as others, I have already covered your mention of the "powers of persuasion" in respect to advertising here for these packages, and they are not the same……….

[cumgranosalum]

Quote cumgranosalum; “You don't seem to understand that national screening and "test packages" are not the same thing”. And, “Unlike screening which is aimed at particular groups (at risk) within a population”

They may not be the same thing, however they certainly overlap in many cases (as is evidenced in one of your links) and they can fulfil a criterion with regards to the "particular groups (at risk) within a population". This particularly when it is suggested that people of my age have annual check-ups which cover prostate and colon, and as I do enjoy a drink or two why shouldn't I have liver and kidney function tests? I'm sure that many posters on TV find themselves in the same situation.

So I consider I am at one of the "at risk groups" and I go for annual check-ups even if I feel healthy, and that includes blood work, as recommended by my well-respected doctor and surgeon back home.

Furthermore your lengthy self-penned post and reproduction of other articles does miss one vital point (several actually) as regards the so-called "advertising to persuade people", especially here in Thailand, because what you see in the hospitals here is not persuasive advertising in any way, shape or form, it is a promotional offer and often poorly presented at that, because it says nothing about the benefits to the consumer, how it will make them feel, and how their life will be better by undertaking this particular promotion, and it usually has no, or a very poor, call to action.

So it does not represent "persuasive advertising" and it is down to the consumer to decide, and even in your own lengthy railing against such practices the following is mentioned: –

“At present, many people rather effusively gush: 'Doctor, give me the works, I want a full check-up!' Many clinics now readily pander to this demand by providing a wide range of 'executive health check-up schemes,' ………

So consumer demand has ensured that many clinics now readily pander to this, so what?

I'm sure a friend of mine who had one of these tests and found that his haematocrit reading was low and he was bleeding internally was very grateful for that finding, as was a lady friend of his who was diagnosed with TB.

And for the record, it would be nice for other posters if you would exercise some "interpersonal skills" when replying to posts rather than calling posters "uninformed" or "ill informed" or that they simply "don't understand", and the following response by you is downright rude, " It appears you are unfamiliar with the "powers of persuasion" used by commerce on the general public - which is unfortunate because you are also clearly subject to them...presumably you are unaware of this.

As for your concept of parameters and their interpretation...yet another field you are uninformed about”...

I noticed there has been feedback of this ilk on another thread so perhaps you would like to rein in your "arrogance and superior attitude" for the benefit of all concerned.

And to show that you can be just as wrong as others, I have already covered your mention of the "powers of persuasion" in respect to advertising here for these packages, and they are not the same……….

"They may not be the same thing, however they certainly overlap in many cases" - what kind of nonsense is that???

public screening is public screening and test packages are simply a sales technique.

Now bereft it seems of any real argument you are trying to shift your own goal posts - you are using the "yes but....." approach

come on! Get up to speed on the issues first.

If you post something that stems from either lack of or mistaken information it is quite sensible to point that out.

What you appear to be doing now is simply attacking the messenger because you don't like the message. If you want to make a point about the topic why not rather than ad hominem approach back it up with a rational argument

"So I consider I am at one of the "at risk groups"" - well QED! They've done a good job on you then!

Edited May 17, 2015 by cumgranosalum

[xylophone]

Quote cumgranosalum; “You don't seem to understand that national screening and "test packages" are not the same thing”. And, “Unlike screening which is aimed at particular groups (at risk) within a population”

They may not be the same thing, however they certainly overlap in many cases (as is evidenced in one of your links) and they can fulfil a criterion with regards to the "particular groups (at risk) within a population". This particularly when it is suggested that people of my age have annual check-ups which cover prostate and colon, and as I do enjoy a drink or two why shouldn't I have liver and kidney function tests? I'm sure that many posters on TV find themselves in the same situation.

So I consider I am at one of the "at risk groups" and I go for annual check-ups even if I feel healthy, and that includes blood work, as recommended by my well-respected doctor and surgeon back home.

Furthermore your lengthy self-penned post and reproduction of other articles does miss one vital point (several actually) as regards the so-called "advertising to persuade people", especially here in Thailand, because what you see in the hospitals here is not persuasive advertising in any way, shape or form, it is a promotional offer and often poorly presented at that, because it says nothing about the benefits to the consumer, how it will make them feel, and how their life will be better by undertaking this particular promotion, and it usually has no, or a very poor, call to action.

So it does not represent "persuasive advertising" and it is down to the consumer to decide, and even in your own lengthy railing against such practices the following is mentioned: –

“At present, many people rather effusively gush: 'Doctor, give me the works, I want a full check-up!' Many clinics now readily pander to this demand by providing a wide range of 'executive health check-up schemes,' ………

So consumer demand has ensured that many clinics now readily pander to this, so what?

I'm sure a friend of mine who had one of these tests and found that his haematocrit reading was low and he was bleeding internally was very grateful for that finding, as was a lady friend of his who was diagnosed with TB.

And for the record, it would be nice for other posters if you would exercise some "interpersonal skills" when replying to posts rather than calling posters "uninformed" or "ill informed" or that they simply "don't understand", and the following response by you is downright rude, " It appears you are unfamiliar with the "powers of persuasion" used by commerce on the general public - which is unfortunate because you are also clearly subject to them...presumably you are unaware of this.

As for your concept of parameters and their interpretation...yet another field you are uninformed about”...

I noticed there has been feedback of this ilk on another thread so perhaps you would like to rein in your "arrogance and superior attitude" for the benefit of all concerned.

And to show that you can be just as wrong as others, I have already covered your mention of the "powers of persuasion" in respect to advertising here for these packages, and they are not the same……….

"They may not be the same thing, however they certainly overlap in many cases" - what kind of nonsense is that???

public screening is public screening and test packages are simply a sales technique.

Now bereft it seems of any real argument you are trying to shift your own goal posts - you are using the "yes but....." approach

come on! Get up to speed on the issues first.

If you post something that stems from either lack of or mistaken information it is quite sensible to point that out.

What you appear to be doing now is simply attacking the messenger because you don't like the message. If you want to make a point about the topic why not rather than ad hominem approach back it up with a rational argument

"So I consider I am at one of the "at risk groups"" - well QED! They've done a good job on you then!

There is no public screening here in Thailand for farangs so if I want to get "screened" I could request it or avail myself of it through one of what you call test packages. So what would normally be available through public screening in other countries can be obtained here through a test package. Simple enough to understand surely (hence the overlap comment).

And anyway, if someone wishes to have a test and get certain things checked out, then why not, better to have certain tests if you have concerns in those areas. You may wish to denigrate them as nothing more than sales techniques, however many others who have had these tests would tell you that they have been happy with the results and/or with the peace of mind they bring. This especially from the two folk I mentioned who uncovered serious ailments from these tests.

One of your articles also interchanges the words "screenings and tests" and the screenings they mention are not public screenings despite your rantings.

"They've done a good job on you then!" Nobody has done a good job on me and as an individual who lives with a low-grade cancer diagnosis, has high cholesterol and is prone to skin cancers, I consider myself to be a person who is "at high risk" as regards medical complications, again as backed up by my own doctor who stipulates regular tests/blood work – – perhaps you'd like to take up your argument with him.

You also make an assumption with your comment, “it would be unlikely that this money spinner has gone unnoticed by the Thai medical industry.......”and as I pointed out to you, there is nothing like what you describe as persuasive advertising in Thai hospitals – – poor promotions yes.

And there is a huge difference between what your article describes as "fear mongering" and what is actually promoted in Thai hospitals.

As regards me backing anything up with a rational argument, as far as you are concerned, you are correct and everyone else is wrong and there is no grey area or middle-ground; and this is backed up by other comments as regards your posts. My comment about "interpersonal skills" was asking you to use them, not attacking you in person, or trying to deviate from the discussion in question. Please understand the difference.

Whereas your comment to another poster that, "Virtually every single word here raises issues of your comprehension of how to assess a doctor or practitioner" implies that he doesn't know what he's talking about, and that is an implication which runs throughout your responses – – "ad hominem", decide for yourself.

Edited May 17, 2015 by xylophone

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

And then, back on the actual subject of this thread:

I don't know how the Thai government, of all entities, is going to try to determine what constitutes "over charging" in the medical field -- although, I really wish they would/could.

I guess it depends on what they mean by over-charging foreigners.

Do they mean, charging foreigners at a different/higher price for the exact same medicine and treatment as charged a private-paying Thai patient at the same hospital? If so, that actually could be enforceable. Except, the same government that's talking about this issue is the one that already endorses double-standard pricing for farangs vs. Thais at various public entities such as national parks. So it kind of makes you wonder.

Or, do they mean, judging somehow that some hospitals are simply charging too much for the service they provide, compared to other hospitals that charge less? Should private hospitals -- with better amenities, equipment and perhaps better qualified doctors -- be charging the same rates as government hospitals? And what about a fancy hospital in BKK vs. a small private hospital in some remote area of Isaan? I can't see how they'd ever make heads or tails out of that issue.

FWIW, I had an interesting discussion with the staff at Phyathai II hospital in BKK the other day, in light of all these recent news articles on the subject. I asked for a copy of the nightly rates for their various types of hospital rooms, including service fees, nursing charges and meals. And they provided me a photocopy of their price list without too much difficulty.

But then I asked, OK, whom do these prices apply to:

--My Thai wife, the answer was yes

--Me, a farang married to a Thai and living here, the answer was yes.

--But then I asked, what about if my father came to visit from the U.S. and needed treatment. Initially, the reception staff told me their room rates would be higher, about 20% they guessed, for a tourist. But then in following up with their actual admissions staff, the answer came out a bit different.

The admissions lady I spoke with, contrary to what I'd just been told, said the hospital's nightly rate (room, nursing, service and meals) would be the same for my Thai wife, me, and my tourist father. But, she said there would be higher charges for my tourist father for other things, including medicines and (although she didn't say it exactly) it seemed like medical procedures as well.

It would be interesting to hear what kind of responses people get when they act those same kinds of questions at other hospitals here.

[Thai at Heart]

And then, back on the actual subject of this thread:

I don't know how the Thai government, of all entities, is going to try to determine what constitutes "over charging" in the medical field -- although, I really wish they would/could.

I guess it depends on what they mean by over-charging foreigners.

Do they mean, charging foreigners at a different/higher price for the exact same medicine and treatment as charged a private-paying Thai patient at the same hospital? If so, that actually could be enforceable. Except, the same government that's talking about this issue is the one that already endorses double-standard pricing for farangs vs. Thais at various public entities such as national parks. So it kind of makes you wonder.

Or, do they mean, judging somehow that some hospitals are simply charging too much for the service they provide, compared to other hospitals that charge less? Should private hospitals -- with better amenities, equipment and perhaps better qualified doctors -- be charging the same rates as government hospitals? And what about a fancy hospital in BKK vs. a small private hospital in some remote area of Isaan? I can't see how they'd ever make heads or tails out of that issue.

FWIW, I had an interesting discussion with the staff at Phyathai II hospital in BKK the other day, in light of all these recent news articles on the subject. I asked for a copy of the nightly rates for their various types of hospital rooms, including service fees, nursing charges and meals. And they provided me a photocopy of their price list without too much difficulty.

But then I asked, OK, whom do these prices apply to:

--My Thai wife, the answer was yes

--Me, a farang married to a Thai and living here, the answer was yes.

--But then I asked, what about if my father came to visit from the U.S. and needed treatment. Initially, the reception staff told me their room rates would be higher, about 20% they guessed, for a tourist. But then in following up with their actual admissions staff, the answer came out a bit different.

The admissions lady I spoke with, contrary to what I'd just been told, said the hospital's nightly rate (room, nursing, service and meals) would be the same for my Thai wife, me, and my tourist father. But, she said there would be higher charges for my tourist father for other things, including medicines and (although she didn't say it exactly) it seemed like medical procedures as well.

It would be interesting to hear what kind of responses people get when they act those same kinds of questions at other hospitals here.

This has probably been initiated by one of the embassies who are settling social security insurance with local hospitals.

A few years ago one of the Arabic states complained massively about bill padding for their patients at one of the Thai hospitals. The hospital put the patients on the street.

I presume someone has complained again.