I was in Cuba on an Xmas/New Year holiday package back in 1982-83 and one of the guys in our resort took seriously ill. He received immediate and excellent treatment in the hospital and stayed behind with his partner to complete the recovery. Everything was free and there was no undue concern with paperwork. Of course Cuba may not have had the expertise and technology to deal with more complex and unusual cases, but within the limits of what was possible for them, they did not shirk. Draw your own conclusions.

Not sure what though. Castro's Cuba was/is a small island with a small population and its policies were based on the attitudes I've emphasised. Also, doctors there were not treated differently from mechanics (a good idea I think) , workers without the class distinctions elsewhere. But the Castro clique came from that humanitarian base!

Not necessarily. Some of the best hospitals are in the USA but are also the most expensive. I suppose if you are willing to pay you can find quality healthcare in most developed countries.

Amir, what about the National Health Service and other similar organisations here in the UK-these are not based on money? USA is probably the worst example here!

There are efforts to lessen or totally scrap off the money paid for healthcare in developing countries like Ghana where there is the introduction of the National Health Insurance Scheme. Unfortunately, this scheme, though has promising goals, it's trailing! Many medicine (in fact very efficient ones) have been taken off the free drugs to be supplied to patients. Health facilities are on the neck of the government because of the huge arrears of their remuneration. In this case, paying would aid you have quality healthcare. It is sad that the poor, though manages to get healthcare, they are sidelined from good medical care because of poverty. The current government is striving to turn the wheels but it has bitten more than it can chew, making the future of free and affordable healthcare very gloomy. Best regards

Following

There is not relation between healthcare and democracies, because each concept concern a different field. It's true that in democracies countries the person can live in better conditions, He can live too in the countries no democracies

The state initiated health care that functions in Western Europe has its predecessors in other parts of the world, for example in the Middle East rulers retained doctors for the general population, but the sense of all members of the population deserving health care (equal if possible) seems to be a liberal construction.

Health care facilities is depending on social infrastructure of the country and the government policy.

Hi,

I agree with Dr. Amir W. Al-Khafaji and Dr. Karl Pfeifer.

Best regards

In my own opinion, I think it should be better in democratic setting but depends on the government in power and the infrastructure available.

Not at all.

I think no! It should be been way better in democratic countries than developing counties, but it is not.

In Brazil, despite being a democracy, the public health system is chaotic