It is more important to spend public money promoting a healthy lifestyle in order to prevent illness than to spend it on the treatment of people who are already ill. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is believed by many that the government should center on financing healthy lifestyle promotion programs instead of curing already ill people. Personally, I advocate this point of view. Obviously, more taxpayers' money should be allocated to activities that contribute to a healthy and balanced life. That is because individuals would lead a healthy life than suffer from ill health and hospitalization. But various diseases are proved to result from human unhealthy habits. For example, young people who rely on snacks and fast meals for their daily needs are highly prone to obesity, which put them at risk of more serious health issues such as heart attack, diabetes, and even cancer later in life. As a result, they must be encouraged to consume healthy foods to avoid those life-threatening health problems. In addition, for a variety of reasons, investing a national budget in a dose of medicine to prevent the prevailing infectious illnesses among patients is difficult. It is evident that there are a number of fatal diseases such as HIV/AIDS and different forms of cancers are insurmountable at present. Although a dose of drugs and therapies might prolong a patient’s life, they can also create sequela such as pleural lesions, necessitating additional courses of medication in the hospital. In fact, the costs of treating those perilous ailments may exceed the patient’s financial capacity, thereby needing governmental spending to alleviate the burden on family finance. In conclusion, I suppose a higher proportion of state funds should be spent on maintaining a healthier lifestyle rather than treating those who are fighting for their lives.