Government should make laws about people’s nutrition and food choice. Other argue that is their choice. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
The idea that the nutritional value in dishes and people choices about food should be imposed laws by the state should remain a source of controversy. While a number of people believe that it is beneficial to some extent, I would argue that these laws are not reasonable and practical.
On the one hand, there are some advantages related to making regulations about inhabitants' nutrition and choice of food. Firstly, it would be the ideal measure to protect citizens' health from various diseases such as cardiovascular diseases or obesity, or diabetes. This is due to the fact that these laws force citizens to opt for food that is fresh and good for their health in order to reduce the risk of these chronic diseases. For example, they are more likely to choose more green vegetables, more fishes, and less meat. As a result, this would alleviate the cost of drugs that have been prescribed to treat these illnesses which means people would be healthier thanks to the laws.
On the other hand, I would contend that these rules are disadvantageous to residents. Individuals have their own right to choose food that they are passionate about. When the authority puts rules and laws about food choice, people feel obligated to purchase foodstuffs that do not fit their appetite. That could lead to some discontent among citizens. Furthermore, it would be hard for the young generation to obey rules about nutrition because they are not mature enough to defeat their temptation with surgery food or fast food. Besides, some people have not sufficient knowledge about nutrition to decide which substances their bodies are demanding.
In conclusion, while others agree that the authority had better make laws about choosing nutritional food, it seems to me that these rules would make people feel compulsory and unhappy.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-02-05 | The Lazy Tiger | 92 | view |
| 2020-12-17 | nuvuong98 | 73 | view |
- The table illustrates the amount of money which is allocated in the US EU and other nations used in support of technology by charities over the period from 2006 to 2010 Overall it is evident that most of the countries experienced an increase during the gi 56
- It is obvious that nowadays there is an increasing number of people purchasing well known designer labels of consumer products While this trend can account for some primary reasons I strongly believe that this is a negative tendency There are two principa 78
- The table illustrates how much money was donated to developing countries in the period 2006 2010 by US and EU charities to support technological development Overall it is clear that total aid increased during this period US aid was considerably higher tha 56
- Many people are now spending more and more time travelling to work or school Some people believe that this is a negative development while others think there are some benefits Discuss both views and give your opinion 89
- The chart below shows waste collection by a recycling centre from 2011 to 2015 Summerize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, firstly, furthermore, so, while, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 35.0 24.0651302605 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1523.0 1615.20841683 94% => OK
No of words: 302.0 315.596192385 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04304635762 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59456684536 2.80592935109 92% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.539735099338 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.3158862987 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.785714286 106.682146367 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5714285714 20.7667163134 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.28571428571 7.06120827912 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.304004174133 0.244688304435 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108951507846 0.084324248473 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0917462861922 0.0667982634062 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210954711768 0.151304729494 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0609808546723 0.056905535591 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.0946893788 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.4159519038 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.92 8.58950901804 92% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 78.4519038076 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.