In an increasingly globalized world, healthcare systems have grown significantly. With the rise of personalized medicine, healthcare funding prioritizes individualized treatment rather than public health initiatives. There is a debate about whether the government should focus on personalized medicine or not. I believe that considering individualized treatments is more effective and can reduce the disease rates.
On the one hand, some people claim that public healthcare initiatives are more crucial in terms of finance. If the government does not pay attention to public health, it leads to ethical problems. People who use personalized medicine may spend a lot of money, which can cause inequality in society and also increase the gap between the rich and the poor. However, this issue can be solved by the financial aid from the government for all citizens.
On the other hand, others believe that individualized medicine is more effective for handling illnesses because it adjusts to people’s DNA, which gives results quickly and efficiently. This type of treatment significantly reduces mortality rates in the long run. Genetic tests provide true medicine and treatment. Additionally, some diseases, such as cancer, better threat because they vary from person to person. As a result, personalized medicine is more effective than public medicine in reducing essential diseases throughout the country.
To sum up, although some individuals consider that public medicine is more valuable in terms of finance and equality, I argue that personalized medicine is more effective in overcoming the issues in terms of reducing mortality rates and solving essential diseases.