Prevention And Treatment Argumentative Essay
It is more important for the government to spend money on promoting the healthy lifestyle to prevent illness rather than on the treatment of people who are really ill. To what extent do you agree or disagree.
Together with the development of modern society, numerous diseases have been spreading around the world, which placed a high pressure on medical systems and authorities. Investment on health care, hence, become a matter of concern. Some are of the opinion that governments should allocate money for promoting healthy lifestyle rather than for treating patients. From my view point, this notion is irrational to some extent.
There is no denying that “an ounce of prevention is better a pound of cure”. However, particularly focusing on healthy lifestyle development cannot help to thoroughly reduce consequences of diseases since this step is just one part of the primary prevention process. Take Ebola as a salient example. Such kind of dangerous virus would have become an epidemic if other interventions such as constant surveillance or early symptom treatment for infected patients were not made. Therefore, it is clear that treatment and prevention are actually two integrated parts to which government should pay attention equally.
Some argue that pitted to the cost of developing medical treatments, health promotion activities not only offer a good return in investment but also ensure a better future for the next generation. That point is partly true. Nevertheless, according to medical ethics, human lives are precious. Provided that severely ill patients have the chance to live, they deserve being cured with all effort. In addition, citizens pay taxes and purchase medical insurance every year so they have same right to health care. Thus, it will be a heretical belief if they suffer from chronic diseases but do not receive adequate treatment.
In conclusion, a fundamental aim of any medical system is to prevent illness and enable people to achieve the highest attainable
Together with the development of modern society, numerous diseases have been spreading around the world, which placed a high pressure on medical systems and authorities. Investment on health care, hence, become a matter of concern. Some are of the opinion that governments should allocate money for promoting healthy lifestyle rather than for treating patients. From my view point, this notion is irrational to some extent.
There is no denying that “an ounce of prevention is better a pound of cure”. However, particularly focusing on healthy lifestyle development cannot help to thoroughly reduce consequences of diseases since this step is just one part of the primary prevention process. Take Ebola as a salient example. Such kind of dangerous virus would have become an epidemic if other interventions such as constant surveillance or early symptom treatment for infected patients were not made. Therefore, it is clear that treatment and prevention are actually two integrated parts to which government should pay attention equally.
Some argue that pitted to the cost of developing medical treatments, health promotion activities not only offer a good return in investment but also ensure a better future for the next generation. That point is partly true. Nevertheless, according to medical ethics, human lives are precious. Provided that severely ill patients have the chance to live, they deserve being cured with all effort. In addition, citizens pay taxes and purchase medical insurance every year so they have same right to health care. Thus, it will be a heretical belief if they suffer from chronic diseases but do not receive adequate treatment.
In conclusion, a fundamental aim of any medical system is to prevent illness and enable people to achieve the highest attainable