The New York Times

It Saves Lives. It Can Save Money. So Why Aren't We Spending More on Public Health?

Not only have many public health interventions in the United States been hugely successful, but they’ve also saved more money than they’ve cost.

And yet Americans spend relatively little money in that domain and far more on medical care that returns less value for its costs. Instead of continually complaining about how much is being spent on health care with little to show for it, maybe we should direct more of that money to public health.

What Do We Mean by Public Health?

It encompasses efforts made to improve the health of a broad population with investments not ordinarily considered “health care.” For example, ad campaigns that encourage better health behaviors — like exercising or quitting smoking.

This article originally appeared in .

You're reading a preview, sign up to read more.

More from The New York Times

The New York Times5 min readTech
How to Organize Your Messy Contacts List
When was the last time you memorized a phone number? Thanks to smartphones and the internet, you can stuff hundreds of numbers and email and mailing addresses into your pocket without a second thought. But those contacts can get disorganized over tim
The New York Times6 min read
How to Protect Your DNA Data Before and After Taking an at-Home Test
Consumer DNA testing kits like those from 23andMe, Ancestry.com and MyHeritage promise a road map to your genealogy and, in some cases, information about what diseases you’re most susceptible to. They also ask for a lot of trust with your DNA informa
The New York Times5 min read
No Longer All Sweetness and Light
Zendaya jumps from Disney to drug binges in HBO’s graphic “Euphoria.” In an interview, the longtime Disney Channel star discusses her “scary” move into explicit, provocative television.