Most developed countries spend a large portion of their health budget on expensive medical technology and procedures. This money should be spend instead on health education to keep people well.
2007-09-24 02:13:59 · 11 answers · asked by shecatar27 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
True, would be better on the long run.
2007-09-24 02:24:54 · answer #1 · answered by Arabian Dune 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It can't be disputed that the least costly health care is healthy living and prevention. Education is part of that, but not all of it. Staying healthy is not just about knowing and implementing the best lifestyle choices, it also about access to routine health care, and at least in part, health and safety standards for our environment (which most developed countries do a good job of)
But I disagree with the opinion because of one word: "Instead". In a rich and free society we do not need to give up life saving and life enhancing medical procedures to redirect those resources to education. We can have the technology and procedures for those that need them as well as the education, the preventative medicine, and the health & safety standards that will lead to fewer people needing more expensive care and procedures.
2007-09-24 03:36:39 · answer #2 · answered by jehen 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with that opinion, however it is the medical technology and procedure's which in turn give people the chance to be healthy.
Without lots of money being spent on procedures to better the technology used today, how will future generations survive from conditions which have no current cure.
Most of the money does go to a just cause, improving health standards and technologies.
2007-09-24 02:40:24 · answer #3 · answered by apocalyptia 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To an extent, as all the viruses that we make are because of humans.
E.g, did you know how stronger strains of bacteria form? People dont take the full course of their antibiotics. I dont see how its bad though, the anti-bio's taste nice, (or when i had mine). Basically, as a result, people are saying "WOOPDEDOO! I feel great, and I dont need this no more," so they stop taking it, and the bacteria has formed its resistance.
They feel bad again, take the medicine but it dont work D:, then they go to the doctor and ask for stronger meds. Doctors gotta comply because its harsher than before, and on the way to the doctor, this guy probaly sneezsed into his hands and touched a pole inside a bus.
But at the same time, we need new medical breakthroughs. Leuichima ( I hope I spelt it right), and cancer bring just as much suffering as growing viruses, so its kind of a mix.
2007-09-24 02:22:16 · answer #4 · answered by Suki 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not so much health education that needs revamped. It's the whole health philosophy. Most developed countries build the structure of their healthcare around finding cures for people that are already sick and treating symptoms.
The focus should be partly on health education(what to do not to become sick), but also on preventative maintenance.
You don't wait for the engine in your car to blow up because the oil goes bad and seizes the engine! You go during the proper intervals, get it checked and the oil changed.
People should be no differnet.
2007-09-24 04:48:56 · answer #5 · answered by gryphon1911 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its about a balanced approach but I agree that its out of balance right now.
'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure'
Most certainly we need to pay more attention to educating people, and encouraging people to take care of themselves however there are a few caveats:
- even with education a lot of people just aren't going to do the right thing.
- there will always be accidents and if I trip and break my arm, I kinda want that x-ray machine to help the doctors diagnose and treat it.
- in most developed countries we spend a lot of money on education too (its just in a separate budget)
2007-09-24 04:01:29 · answer #6 · answered by megalomaniac 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree. The medical profession is about taking care of the side effects of a disease instead fo curing the disease itself. i wish they would spend more money on prevention education!
2007-09-24 02:22:10 · answer #7 · answered by Randall 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I some what agree, but why not combine the two. In addition, shouldn't this be part of our educational system already?
2007-09-24 02:35:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
but most diseases can attack and infect people regardless of how much or how little they know about the disease. by removing technology to educate people on diseases you would basically be taking away the chances of innocent people who unfortunately caught diseases
2007-09-24 05:22:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2007-09-24 02:20:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋