Opinions are divided on whether the sovereign should exclusively concentrate on environmental contamination and residential issues with a view to inhibit diseases. Despite the fact that these methods are effective, I argue that many aspects like overconsumption or less activities relating to disease should be taken into consideration.
On the one hand, it is understandable why some support the governmental attempts to solve environmental and housing problems. This is because the authorities could encourage the usage of green energy in daily activities. By providing such eco – friendly power resources would protect citizens from air pollution caused by massive vehicles and manufactures, which can directly affect people’s health such as: respiratory illnesses or lung cancer,… Moreover, investing in affordable housing schemes and subsidies can boost public health and safety. This action plummets the homeless rates in crowded cities like Ho Chi Minh or Ha Noi where viruses can spread quickly.
On the other hand, I contend that it would be better to consider significant threats to human’s overall well – being. The overconsumption of fast food and addictive food which contribute to weakening people’s immune system and causing more diseases, namely obesity. Thus,with the power of government can put a higher tax on these products, leading to higher prices and potentially reducing consumption. Furthermore, the authorities would launch outdoor initiatives encouraging people who tend to engage in fewer outdoor activities. Such an approach can release abundant fat and promote healthier residents.
In conclusion, while the environment and housing issues should undeniably be a focal point for people’s health, these aspects such as: food and outdoor activities can not be entirely dismissed. A nuanced method is essential for striking the right balance between aspects in life.