Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

The prevention of health problems and illness is more important than treatment and medicines. Government funding should reflect this. To what extent to you agree or disagree? v.1

The prevention of health problems and illness is more important than treatment and medicines. Government funding should reflect this. v. 1
It is sometimes argued that more money should be spent on preventive measures than treatments, as they are of greater importance. However, I would argue that cure and prevention are equally important when it comes to spending money in these areas. There are several reasons why it can be argued that government should spend money on tackling the causes of diseases. Cost-effectiveness is the key element when placing more importance on these initiatives. By allowing people to have access to these health monitoring strategies, governments can avoid the hefty priced hospitalised treatments or other extravagantly expensive medicines. Take the modified gene coding as an example, the technique of relocating genes in the DNA of human beings can help deliberately avoiding inherited lethal illnesses in newborns such as diabetes. In this way, not only the financial pressure on health care departments can be reduced, but also the painful suffering caused by these contagious sicknesses. Hence, an improved quality of life for those who take these measures is a better alternative. So, if government prioritises preventative approaches as a mandatory element in tackling health problems, people would surely be leading healthy lives in a near future. I also believe that spending on treatments or medicines has of proportionately equal importance as of managing causes. Some diseases are too fatal that cannot be left without an intensive, holistic and advanced treatment. For instance, carcinogenic patients would have never been recovered with ever greater speed today, if huge state budget were not invested to produce chemotherapy. Similarly, without enough government funds for the best possible treatments to vulnerable patients, people' life expectancy will be affected devastatingly. So both these departments should be given equal money to keep them going. In conclusion, governments have to make health reforms properly by investing equally in the cure and prevention of epidemic health illnesses in order to have better outcomes from health deprived people as well as ensuring a healthy and energetic living for them.
It is
sometimes
argued that more
money
should
be spent
on preventive measures than
treatments
, as they are of greater importance.
However
, I would argue that cure and prevention are
equally
important
when it
comes
to spending
money
in these areas.

There are several reasons why it can
be argued
that
government
should spend
money
on tackling the causes of diseases. Cost-effectiveness is the key element when placing more importance on these initiatives. By allowing
people
to have access to these
health
monitoring strategies,
governments
can avoid the hefty priced
hospitalised
treatments
or other
extravagantly
expensive medicines. Take the modified gene coding as an example, the technique of relocating genes in the DNA of human beings can
help
deliberately
avoiding inherited lethal illnesses in newborns such as diabetes. In this way, not
only
the financial pressure on
health
care departments can be
reduced
,
but
also
the painful suffering caused by these contagious sicknesses.
Hence
, an
improved
quality of life for those who take these measures is a better alternative.
So
, if
government
prioritises
preventative approaches as a mandatory element in tackling
health
problems,
people
would
surely
be leading healthy
lives
in a near future.

I
also
believe that spending on
treatments
or medicines has of
proportionately
equal importance as of managing causes.
Some
diseases are too fatal that cannot be
left
without an intensive, holistic and advanced
treatment
.
For instance
, carcinogenic patients would have never
been recovered
with ever greater speed
today
, if huge state budget were not invested to produce chemotherapy.
Similarly
, without
enough
government
funds for the best possible
treatments
to vulnerable patients,
people
' life expectancy will be
affected
devastatingly
.
So
both these departments should be
given
equal
money
to
keep
them going.

In conclusion
,
governments
have to
make
health
reforms
properly
by investing
equally
in the cure and prevention of epidemic
health
illnesses in order to have better outcomes from
health
deprived
people
as well
as ensuring a healthy and energetic living for them.
12Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
20Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
2Mistakes
The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

IELTS essay The prevention of health problems and illness is more important than treatment and medicines. Government funding should reflect this. v. 1

Essay
  American English
4 paragraphs
327 words
6
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 6.0
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.0
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 6.5
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Similar posts