Is it just possible that the money we spend every year to test well people for Disease might be better spent on treating the ill. Do you perhaps have a story to tell which justifies this ongoing expenditure?
sort by best latest
An excellent response to this question. I listened to a lady on the radio the other day who said that tests could be harmful and a were a waste of resources.. I think you have blown that one out of the water.
I really appreciate your taking the time to offer such a well thought out response. Getting the balance right sure is tricky. The UK has an enormous aging population, children living in poverty and an influx of additional people draining resources..
We can only hope and pray that this becomes a reality in time. There are also of course those who seek to profit from these Vaccines but perhaps they deserve to if they can really make it happen.
I think I phrased this question incorrectly, I was thinking more about annual tests for diseases on well people rather than what we spend on leisure.
I guess I was wondering why the NHS for instance, spends so much money on giving people annual mammograms or cancer tests when such a small percentage prove positive.
Your lifetime risk of breast cancer alone is one in eight if you are a woman. Wouldn't it be nice for all of those ones in eight to be diagnosed before a terminal stage? From a money perspective, it's also cheaper to treat when caught early.
Early detection of any cancer raises the possibility of a cure.
I know many people where early detection of cancer was life saving. I have also seen the terrible effects of treatment which came to nothing.