Cuban doctors' don't seem to be very happy with that, according to the NYT and BBC:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/29/world/americas/brazil-cub...

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48214513

The same applies for Iceland. Nurses keep striking, doctors call for more funding, health care experts keep complaining about lack of facilities. Yet Iceland has one of the best health care system in the world.

Be it a capitalist country like Iceland or a socialist like Cuba, with enough funding and an educated workforce you can run a pretty successful healthcare system, despite the fact that it could be better. And perhaps that is precisely why the workers in a successful healthcare system complain. They are educated enough to know how it could be improved even further.

Your answer is not related to the content of the articles.

The articles are about Cuban doctors complaining about their working conditions and compensation as they are sent abroad. You used them as a way to answer your parent, who’s central claim was that that it is a well known fact that Cuba’s health care system is good actually. They provide the fact that Cuba exports doctors as an example of how successful their healthcare system is.

To me it sounded like you were using the fact that doctors complain about their working condition as evidence against parent’s claim. So it felt natural to explain that a healthcare system can be successful despite the fact that the workers in said system have complaints about it.

Ideally these workers should be paid a fair share for their labor (particularly when their boss—the Cuban Government—claims to be a socialist). But regrettably that is not the world we live in. I wouldn’t be surprised—if the numbers were crunched—that a doctor employed by a for profit hospital in a capitalist country also only received a tenth to a quarter of the profits they generate, after their bosses take their profits and their governments take their taxes.

While important to you and me, the attitude of the doctors is not in question here, just the level of Cuba's medical expertise.

Most of the reports I've read about Cuba's healthcare metrics are heavily reliant on trusting data released by the Cuban government (particularly around life expectancy and infant mortality), not subject to independent audit. Haven't looked closely at the sources in your citation, though.

Is this not the case with all basic metrics of every nation?

No: NGOs, academia, a free press... None of these to my knowledge are able to operate in Cuba with what most of us would consider trustable autonomy from the government in publishing information that constitutes an independent research.

There are scientific publications every year by cuban doctors that corroborate that data. None disputes the superiority of cuban health system

> they have one of the best medical systems in the world.

This feels like a specific claim being made.

For everyone downvoting me, just want you to know that yellow is one of the worst colors in the world.