Here is debatable topic. Weather we should start more prevention of diseases or to keep trying to cure them. For example why are we spending so much money on curing AIDS? when to prevent it we can use condoms. Why are we trying to cure lung cancer(and other cancers), when all we have to do is stop smoking and eat our vegetables. In most cases the person who gets a disease has provoked it by being malnourished, and doing nothing to prevent it from happening. Are we jus getting lazy?

We should work more on preventing disease, but still a bit on curing them. For one its a lot less inexpensive to prevent a disease then to find a cure and give that cure to people. Also, if people would just prevent themsleves from getting a disease, It would be much easier to stop it from spreading.

Well I guess people these days are getting more lazy. Also people are just too ignorant to stop hurting themselves and the people around them. If we find cures to the diseases, we could just stop the diseases. But if cures were found, then people will still hurt themselves knowing that there is a cure.

Yes preveting thme would be beter.If one person it can speard and affect many people.

We should put most of our efforts into prevention, but still some into cures.  A person who gets a genetic disease does not have a choice whether or not he gets it, so that is why we still need to work on cures.

I agree, if we made it easier to stop spreading it, then we probably would have more time to focus on finding a cure, rather letting it spread all over the place and make it evolve or something worse.

I agree, prevention is most important, but if a child has a disease then working on curing them also is important. But that brings us back to why the child has it? Maybe its the parents fault for being irresponsible.

Not neccasarily though, kids can get disease without the parents even realizing it till its too late.  Disease is, hard to blame on someone, because its so random and hard to control. Unless it was a desease that could be vaccinated, then it would be the parents fault.

I mean, if you get cancer from smoking, that is no one's fault but your own.  However, if your family gene pool is prone to some disease, and you haven't edged that disease on in any way, there really isn't much you can do.

Your forgetting the economic side for this. Lets say a company like bayer spends millions on curing AIDS and he does so. THEN that company is going to fly straight off the roof making this cure and it'll make a good lot of cash I can assure you. So alot of companys want that cure for cash.

Also, sometimes condoms can break/slip, usually people notice. The difference is though, that AIDS can come from people you could have had some weird "I did people" life  that you don't know about. You 2 eventually fall in love and end up with AIDS. Would also suck, I say, we should do somekind of test for it. [Since AIDS takes sometimes even 10 Years to poof up, even if you had it with alot of people, you won't know you have it until some time]

Also, the other fact is if that if someone has Aids and you sadly get pushed into doing drugs with needles. You might be at some drug party and if someone gave you their used needle you have a new way to get AIDS. So it REALLY sucks.

I say, that we should REALLY pinpoint on how to prevent getting it. [Using condoms, getting tests with your partner before anything,  not doing this, not doing drugs, etc., etc.]

Also, GoldenCross, any cancer that came out of family Gene pools is usually stoppable. Besides BreastCancer which really sucks, things like Diabetes can be controlled and you can live with for some time. Also, I'm not sure about this, but if your parents had the $$ and hadn't vaccinated you, I THINK there'd be some problem with the law then. Not sure, though.

We've already created a vaccine for AIDS. It's just like the flu, though - it changes rapidly, so a new vaccine must be acquired periodically.