| Verified against primary record | |
| Classification chapter | A separate ICD-11 chapter for optional use, for statistical recording only[1] |
|---|---|
| Not an endorsement | WHO states the chapter neither judges nor endorses scientific validity or efficacy[1] |
| Regulation of herbal medicines | 124 member states have passed laws or regulation (year not stated)[2] |
| Records read | WHO classification FAQ, question set and strategy page, 30 September 2026 |
| Provider-supplied | |
| India | State promotion of traditional medicine travel through a national programme and interest subsidy[4] |
| Bands apply only to the rows beneath them. This entry reports the governance and classification position; it takes no position on efficacy. | |
Traditional medicine tourism is travel to receive treatment within a traditional system of medicine, such as Ayurveda or traditional Chinese medicine, usually in a country where that system is established and state-supported. The World Health Organization defines traditional medicine as codified or non-codified systems for health care and well-being comprising practices, skills, knowledge and philosophies, emphasising nature-based remedies and holistic, personalised approaches.[2]
The classification fact, stated precisely
The most frequently misreported fact about this field is the inclusion of a traditional medicine chapter in the eleventh revision of the International Classification of Diseases. It is routinely described as the World Health Organization recognising, validating or endorsing traditional medicine. The organisation’s own explanation says otherwise, and the wording is worth reproducing exactly.
It describes the chapter as a separate chapter within the classification for optional use, providing a list of diagnostic categories to collect and report on traditional medicine conditions in a standardised and internationally comparable manner, used only for optional dual coding in morbidity data collection. It then states directly that the traditional medicine chapter is neither judging nor endorsing the scientific validity of any traditional medicine practice or the efficacy of any traditional medicine intervention.[1]
Its scope is also narrower than usually reported. The chapter currently covers traditional medicine conditions which originated in ancient China and are now commonly used in China, Japan, Korea and elsewhere, forming the first module; a second module derived from Ayurveda is stated to be under development.[1] It is not a general traditional medicine chapter, and Ayurveda is not yet in it.
Governance and regulation
The organisation reports that 124 member states have passed laws or regulation for herbal medicines, a figure given without a reference year, and references a 2019 report on the use of traditional, complementary and integrative medicine across 170 countries. It established a Global Traditional Medicine Centre in India in 2022, described as a global hub for knowledge, innovation and partnerships.[2]
A global traditional medicine strategy for 2025 to 2034 was adopted by the Seventy-eighth World Health Assembly, published in October 2025, organised around four objectives: strengthening the evidence base, ensuring safety and regulation, integrating these practices into health systems, and optimising cross-sectoral value.[3] That the first objective is strengthening the evidence base is itself informative about the current position.
State promotion
Unusually among medical travel sectors, this one is actively promoted by governments as national policy. India’s ministry responsible for traditional systems told its parliament in March 2023 that a national initiative promotes medical tourism in the country, that a champion service sector scheme for medical value travel provides financial assistance in the form of interest subsidy to private investors establishing specialty hospitals and day care centres, that a single-entry portal had been developed, and that a memorandum of understanding had been signed with the national tourism development corporation to promote medical value travel in Ayurveda and traditional medicine systems. It listed ten national institutes with attached hospitals.[4]
That is a state promotional source about its own sector and is classed as such here. It is good evidence that the promotion exists; it is not evidence about clinical outcomes, and it contains no funding amounts and no foreign patient numbers. Figures circulating for the size of this market originate with commercial research and are not reproduced.
See also
- Wellness tourism, the adjacent category this is frequently sold within
- Thermal tourism, another long-established therapy with a contested evidence base
- Medical travel and cultural familiarity, a common motive for this travel
- Medical tourism stakeholders, including the state bodies promoting this sector
References
- World Health Organization. Classifications frequently asked questions: Traditional Medicine. Verified against primary record: institutional classification guidance opened and read. Retrieved 30 September 2026.
- World Health Organization. Traditional medicine: questions and answers. Verified against primary record: institutional question set opened and read. The figure of 124 member states carries no reference year. Retrieved 30 September 2026.
- World Health Organization. Global traditional medicine strategy 2025 to 2034. Publication date stated as 30 October 2025; adopted by the Seventy-eighth World Health Assembly. Verified against primary record: publication page opened and read. Retrieved 30 September 2026.
- Press Information Bureau, Government of India, Ministry of Ayush. Government to promote AYUSH treatment through health tourism. 17 March 2023, written reply to the Lok Sabha. Provider-supplied: state promotional source describing its own programme. Retrieved 30 September 2026.
Sourcing note: the classification guidance, the question set, the strategy page and the Indian parliamentary reply were opened and read on 30 September 2026. The classification chapter’s optional status, its narrow scope and the organisation’s explicit statement that it does not endorse efficacy are reproduced together, because separating them produces the misreading that is standard in writing on this subject. The figure of 124 member states carries no reference year and a 2024 global report exists whose body was not read and may supersede it. The Indian material is classed as state promotional.