Do you think governments should fund mostly for prevention or cure?why?

It seems like that one of the major problems in all of the countries is health so in my reckoning, I suppose prevention and cure both are significant and government should fund them as regards more attention for prevention can be caused to decrease the cost of cure. in this essay I clarify this issue. On the one hand, there are several prevention ways to control health problems. I daresay that plenty of diseases can be detected by detected by tests such as blood test, radiography, sonography, MRI and so on. For instance, if cancer found in first stages not only survive patient but also reduce cost of treatment. The other example is diabetes that can be diagnosed by blood test and if it controls in first steps that can exclude of disease progress and more expend money. In addition, people can be encouraged to adopt a healthy lifestyle by government that cab be reduce number of sicknesses. For example, junk foods advertising should be tightly controlled and banded altogether which has a harmful effect on health and encourage people to eat healthy food. However, prevention help to control and reduce number of diseases but there are many illnesses and injuries so cure is essential thus public money is better spent on health care than on showcase projects such as high-speed rail networks or painting on a public walls. as well as, condition in state hospitals reflect the degree of civilization is society which means that the quantity and quality of hospitals can present the rate of health care which created by government. To sum up, I believe that attention on prevention can reduce many diseases therefore this issue not only help people to outlive but also save public money which is ideal idea of any government.