Shops should not be allowed to sell any food or drinks that have been scientifically proven to be bad for people’s health. To what extent do you agree or disagree
Nowadays, restricting buying-selling products consisting of scientifically dangerous ingredients has to be imposed to reduce the unhealthy lifestyle among societies. Partially, I consent to the same point of view for some reasons which I will elaborate in the following paragraph.
On the one hand, perhaps, to legally supervise the consumer products threatening people's life induces the disruption of economic cycle both vendor (micro) and national revenue (macro). To illustrate, in Indonesia, instant noodles sold by numerous convenience stores as its core business profoundly contribute higher local income and tax revenue. Furthermore, according to the affordability, this probably increases the pricing level of conventional products chosen by modern people. Substitution products converted to primary needs would inflict the higher living standard. Consequently, certain societies (lowest socioeconomic position) seem difficult to afford their daily necessities.
On the flip side, in my point of view, the more products will be restricted, the healthier the society will be. This occurs since machine-processed foods and beverages may require higher food grade considering the nutritious consumption as a main priority in its production. In addition, if government system does not impose this policy, more and more groups of society will consume unhealthy products time after time without considering health-related issues (obesity and cardiovascular diseases). Subsequently, the growing number of mortality rate brings a decrease on people’s life expectancy.
To sum up, it seems to me that, imposing strict policy of dangerous consumer products might bring several benefits; health-thriving population and well aware of related diseases. This is as long as the products remain the major domestic and state income.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-01 | thaohienpt008 | 73 | view |
| 2023-04-17 | Mollymaul | 84 | view |
| 2023-04-14 | Mollymaul | 84 | view |
| 2022-12-08 | Andi Irwan Nur | 84 | view |
| 2022-12-08 | Andi Irwan Nur | 61 | view |
- People nowadays send text messages more frequently than they talk on the phone What are the reasons for this trend Do the advantages of texting outweigh the disadvantages 70
- Shops should not be allowed to sell any food or drinks that have been scientifically proven to be bad for people s health To what extent do you agree or disagree 61
- Some people think that parents have a powerful influence in child s life while the influence from outside the home plays a bigger part of child s development To what extent do you agree or disagree 78
- People nowadays send text messages more frequently than they talk on the phone What are the reasons for this trend Do the advantages of texting outweigh the disadvantages 61
- Shops should not be allowed to sell any food or drinks that have been scientifically proven to be bad for people s health To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 592, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'societies the lowest'.
Suggestion: societies the lowest
... living standard. Consequently, certain societies lowest socioeconomic position seem difficult t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, furthermore, if, may, so, well, as to, in addition, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 13.1623246493 30% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1558.0 1615.20841683 96% => OK
No of words: 263.0 315.596192385 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.92395437262 5.12529762239 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25437970925 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.699619771863 0.561755894193 125% => OK
syllable_count: 482.4 506.74238477 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.0150787686 49.4020404114 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.846153846 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2307692308 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15384615385 7.06120827912 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.67935871743 35% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0926061292734 0.244688304435 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0301258041939 0.084324248473 36% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0368393483718 0.0667982634062 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0566154883887 0.151304729494 37% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0421267431316 0.056905535591 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.0946893788 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 50.2224549098 68% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.06 12.4159519038 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.75 8.58950901804 125% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.