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

It is often argued

that is

better to prevent than cure. In my opinion,

this

statement is true. In the following paragraphs, I will discuss why I believe that prevention is a better investment after all. To start, the costs involved in the treatment of diseases are mostly higher than the costs of prevention.

Firstly

, acting beforehand may avoid completely the problem or at least keep the consequences to a minimum. A good example of

that is

preventing lung cancer by not smoking.

This

action reduces the probability of developing long cancer while

also

increasing the chances of successful treatment if cancer appears.

Secondly

, preventative initiatives are more efficient because just one of them may be able to avoid a variety of health issues. Regular exercise

for example

is a very effective way to prevent heart diseases, stroke, diabetes and depression. Another important aspect is that preventative measures can be very simple and easy to implement on a larger scale. From a simple educational ad at the local newspaper to a massive social media campaign, it is possible to reach a vast audience using limited resources. Considering that research funding is scarce, the money saved in

such

campaigns allows research institutions to better allocate their resources to solving problems that can not be prevented,

such

as genetic conditions or disabilities caused by accidents. To conclude, compared to researching and treating, preventative measures are a better investment in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, which allows a better allocation of scarce resources.