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

It is said that it is better to prevent a

health

problem rather than try to care for it after infection because the process of curing is required a considerable amount of money. Admittedly, I completely agree with the statement given

due to

reasons which will be elaborated on in

this

essay.

To begin

with, there are many diseases which can be easily prevented by diverting a small portion of the

government

's

health

budget to precautionary measures.

That is

, if authorities subsidize some products or activities, many fatal may decrease significantly. Take obesity which is the root cause of many deadly diseases

for example

; by helping individuals to afford gym membership, the

government

can easily decline the cost of hospitalized people who suffer from heart problems. Another justifiable reason for putting

government

fund into a scheme that improves

society

's

overall

health

is that facing serious

health

problem not only put a burden on

society

's shoulder but is

also

harmful to human capital.

For instance

, a teacher or an engineer is a valuable asset to

society

. For many years, the money of taxpayers has gone to the education of

such

civilians. The probable death of these important employees

as a result

of cancer, which can be prevented by using a healthy diet, means wasting a considerable amount of budget. In conclusion, it is true that it is better to try to establish a healthy

society

instead

of increasing

government

expenditure for hospital treatment.

That is

because precaution is not costly, and it saves human capital.