Consider what it would mean if that economic analysis of mental illness determined that treating it was not profitable. What then? If easing suffering is not profitable, are we willing to allow people to suffer?
Have you ever been frustrated with an organization of which you were a member? Have you wanted to change an ineffective process, had solutions people agreed were good, yet still failed to get the organization to implement the change?
Why do we accept that you will trust your judgement over science when merging into traffic, but criticize parents who trust their judgement over science when withholding vaccinations from their children? Why is merging into traffic something that requires personal discretion whereas, with vaccinations, science trumps personal discretion?
When was the last time you presented rock-solid evidence to support your point in a debate only to have the other person completely ignore it?