The BBC website carried a piece this week titled 'Tirana Teeth', which focused on patients traveling to Albania for dental treatment. GDPUK editor Jaimie Kaffash argues that this is irresponsible journalism
It has become a bit of a national sport to bash the BBC. I hear some people say ‘if they are being criticised on all sides, they must be doing something right!’ That is not a view I subscribe to – I know how easy it is to annoy everyone all at once.
Personally, I have a difficult relationship with BBC news. As editor of Pulse, the magazine for GPs (and GDPUK’s sister title), it became clear to me that the BBC would follow the national printed press’s news agenda. When we sent out press releases to all media, the BBC would only cover the story if it had already appeared in the Mail or the Telegraph. Eagle-eyed readers might see how following the leads of these particular publications may be problematic. And then the BBC would be the only one to not credit Pulse (and yes, I know how petty I am).
When we did do investigations that the BBC picked up - after other titles had done so, of course - they would normally lead on the response from official bodies. And, of course, like many others, it bothers me how they will give similar weight to what random members of the public say as they do to actual experts.
However, BBC news covers a huge spectrum, and there are some elements of their coverage that are fantastic. For example, their local news – this fills a space that has been vacated by local papers in recent years. And their consumer affairs investigations, where they highlight shoddy business practices – especially Victoria Derbyshire’s various series – further the public interest.
All of which leads me to an article they published on the BBC website this week: 'Tirana teeth': Albania hopes to be the new Turkey for dental work.
This could have been an excellent consumer affairs investigation. But it is instead a bizarre article from start to finish, and read as an advert for Albanian dentistry. I’ll start with perhaps the one good part of it – the context around the problems identified with dental tourism in Turkiye:
‘The UK Foreign Office warns that it is "aware of seven British nationals having died in Türkiye in 2025 following medical procedures". It adds that "some British nationals have also experienced complications [after surgery in Türkiye], and needed further treatment or surgery following their procedure."’
This is the nub of the issue. Overseas treatments are problematic, especially when they are done because they are cheaper than in the UK. The UK has no oversight on the regulation of these practices and it tends to be UK dentists – or even potentially the wider NHS – cleaning up any mess. Any article on alternatives to Türkiye should be focused on patient safety.
But this article’s evidence for Albanian dentistry being safer was, shall we say, slightly less than robust. It quoted its main case study, Anthony Hook, a patient who went to Albania to sort his missing teeth:
‘Hook says he wouldn't go to Turkey "because I have heard so many bad things", adding that he investigated thoroughly before taking the plunge in Tirana.
‘"I went onto the internet and looked into it properly. It took me two days to research it because I'm not one for jumping into anything."
‘Several return trips later, Anthony now has a mouthful of impressive implants – and, unsurprisingly, he is all smiles. "I'd come here once a month for a holiday if I could," he chuckles.’
This is not the only evidence. It also quotes an Albanian dental company owner, who talks about how he is not interested in ‘damaging proper teeth for aesthetics’, but in ‘changing people's lives’ through restoring their ability to chew. He is also given the chance to discuss how being out of the EU means low costs will continue, and that there are more low cost flights to Tirana nowadays too. In fairness, he does suggest a growth in dental tourism ‘could lead to less scrupulous operators ruining the business for everyone’.
I may come across as a little snarky, but I also don’t mean to denigrate Albanian dentistry. Maybe Albanian dentistry does have higher standards than Türkiye, maybe it is safer, maybe all practice owners are more concerned with restoring patients’ ability to chew than they are about damaging healthy teeth for aesthetic purposes. I genuinely don’t know.
But that’s the point – because, after reading an article that will be read by thousands of people, I should know. And I should be getting better evidence than the say so of a business owner with a vested interest in drumming up interest, and having faith in the research gathering skills of Mr Hook. This is what good health journalism should do.
So here is the kicker. The writer of this piece is a business reporter. But this is a health story. It should be about the safety of treatment over and above the cost of treatment or flights. A heath journalist would know to contact experts in UK dentistry and that their input would be more valuable than Mr Hook’s, with all due respect.
Dental tourism is a vital topic, and has implications for patient access, oral health, and the wider NHS. If Country X had seen a few bungee cords snap, your feature on Country Y’s play for the market should probably centre around whether their cords are stronger. It’s the same with dental tourism. Maybe the BBC should consider this the next time they do a puff piece on cheaper healthcare options.