The prevention of health problems and illness is more important than treatment and medicine. Government should reflect this. To what extent do you agree
Government spending usually shows where it's priority lies. In healthcare, it is said that prevention of health problems and illness is more important than treatment and medicine, and therefore, government funding should reflect it. This essay will discuss why I agree with this notion. It is a popular saying that prevention is better than cure. It will be more beneficial to a government and it's citizens to budget more on prevention than treatment. One major reason is that the cost of treatment is often higher than the cost of prevention. Purchasing medicine or having to undergo surgeory in order to treat a disease requires a lot of money. On the order hand, when money is spent on projects such as sensitization or vaccinations, the cost incurred by the government will be less in the long run especially, for a nation that takes the healthcare of it's people importantly. For example, the United States spends 40 percent of it's healthcare budget on sensitization, and a recent report by their department of health attributed the reduction of sexually transmitted diseases to increased sensitization. Furthermore, prevention promotes mental and emotional well-being as well. People who have never contacted a disease are less likely to be depressed. This can really improve the standard of living in a community or nation. Take or instance the recent list of the 10 happiest countries in the world. A common feature among them them is a good healthcare plan and low sickness or disease occurence. In conclusion, I agree with the idea that government funding should focus more on prevention of healthcare problems than treatment or medicine even though the latter should also be a critical component of helthcare funding.
Submitted by Ovo on