"Prevention is better than cure". Researching and treating diseases is too costly so it would be better to invest in preventive measures. To what extent do you agree?

It is argued that spending

money

in preventing diseases would be better than curing them as they are costly, given that prevention is better than cure.

This

essay disagrees with that statement because it would be challenging to predict diseases, and it

also

wastes the

researcher

's

time

. A good reason not to invest

money

in preventive steps is that it is difficult to predict diseases.

In other words

, there are millions of bacteria and viruses which can cause several illnesses to humans, so it becomes hard to foresee illnesses caused by them. The result of

this

is a huge amount of the government's

money

will be wasted in these activities.

For instance

, a meticulous research study carried out by the postgraduate students of Chicago State University found that each virus can cause several hundreds of diseases in humans. Another point to consider is that it wastes the

researcher

's

time

. If researchers spend their

time

on identifying and preventing various diseases, they are not able to address the current problems in the field of medicine. The outcome of

this

is a precious

time

of researchers will be wasted.

This

was illustrated by a recent article published in TimesNow newspaper that, more than 70% of the

researcher

's

time

in the USA is spent on discovering and preventing various disease-causing viruses, but it improved only 5% of its citizen's health. In conclusion,

money

should not be wasted on preventive steps to kill viruses and bacteria because it would be difficult to predict new diseases, and it

also

wastes a considerable amount of the

researcher

's

time

.