Spending Public Money on Health Prevention Versus Treatment

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

Annotated response

3 correction notes

Showing 3 correction notes.

Some people assert that investing public money in the promotion of healthy living can have significantly bigger impacts on disease prevention than spending tax money on treating existing patients. Although raising awareness of a healthy lifestyle is of great importance, I firmly believe that the government would be better off spending money on curing existing diseases.

On the one hand, it is a valid argument to suggest spending taxpayers' money on promoting a healthy lifestyle because many medical conditions are simply the result of bad lifestyle choices, including poor dietary habits and lack of physical exercise. For example, the obesity epidemic, one of the culprits behind heart failure and diabetes, is fueled by the availability of fast food and sugary drinks , both of which are consumed at an alarming rate by people who lack good eating habits and knowledge of nutrition. Furthermore, the excessive intake of unhealthy food works in conjunction with a sedentary lifestyle where exercise is forgoed , putting the health of many citizens at risk. Therefore, educating the public about the importance of portion control and healthy diets could be a good weight-related diseases.

On the other hand, there is no good reason to say that funding treatment for people who are already diagnosed with illnesses is less important. First, without proper treatment and medical care, people suffering from existing diseases could die from curable diseases . For instance, complications caused by the Covid-19 virus can make its hosts lose their ability to breathe, causing untold , but if a vaccine is administered in a timely manner, patients have a high chance of survival. Another important point to take into consideration is that promoting healthy life choices is not a thorough approach to disease prevention since people’s habits and vices tend to differ from one another. Therefore, information about good diets and workout regimes will only benefit people who are already conscious of their health, and people who are prone to unhealthy lifestyle patterns will simply ignore such measures.

In conclusion, although encouraging people to could prevent some diseases to a certain extent, it is not a conclusive solution. Thus, the state should continue funding the treatment of patients with existing health problems.

Overall assessment

Why this response received Band 7.0

The essay presents a clear argument for treatment funding and acknowledges the value of prevention. Its vocabulary and paragraphing are generally effective. The vaccine example does not support the contrast between prevention and treatment for existing illness, while the claim that health advice reaches only already health-conscious people needs qualification. Some verb-form and noun-number slips reduce accuracy.

IELTS criteria

How each score was decided

Task Response

7.0

The preference for treatment funding is clear and the prevention argument is developed. However, vaccination presented as care for acute symptoms does not support the treatment contrast, and the claim that health advice helps only already health-conscious people is too absolute.

Coherence and Cohesion

7.0

Paragraphing is logical with clear linking devices and progression throughout, although some connectors and referencing are slightly mechanical or imprecise.

Lexical Resource

7.0

Vocabulary is flexible and largely precise, with natural collocations such as 'culprits behind heart failure' and 'sedentary lifestyle', with only occasional awkward or erroneous word choices like 'forgoed' and 'conclusive solution'.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy

7.0

Complex sentences generally show good control. Errors include the verb form 'forgoed' and singular 'death' after 'numbers of', while several spaces before punctuation need removal. These slips reduce accuracy without usually obscuring the meaning.