More and more people are becoming seriously overweight. Some people say that the price increase of fattening foods will solve this problem. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Discussions regarding being overweight have significantly soared in popularity. It is sometimes argued that a price hike on rich fat foods is the best solution to this issue, whereas I am of the opinion that there are various measures such as portion control to deal with this problem.
On the one hand, the idea of the burgeoning price of fattening products is beneficial to some extent. Firstly, this solution dissuades individuals who are becoming obese from consuming fast foods due to their saving money. Consequently, should they want to save money and consume large meal portions, they will purchase healthy foods such as vegetables and no-lipid products. Furthermore, when the fattening food prices increase, and buyers still want to consume it, they have to bolster their work time to earn more money to buy those foods. Therefore, calories will be decreased if obese people are in charge of more workloads.
On the other hand, there are a variety of reasons why I also believe that portion control curbs the obesity epidemic. The factor relates to portion control which persuades overweight people to consume fewer calories per meal. If portions are decreased for every meal, it could lead to people consuming fewer calories per meal and thus becoming less obese. For instance, creating bowls smaller encourages individuals to consume less food. To be specific, if fast-food restaurants apply this method to their menu, it could potentially decrease obesity rates.
In conclusion, although a price hike on fattening foods presents benefits, I contend that it should not be the only solution to decrease obesity rates. It is advisable that other methods such as portion control be more effective.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, if, regarding, so, still, therefore, thus, whereas, for instance, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1437.0 1615.20841683 89% => OK
No of words: 276.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20652173913 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67638381978 2.80592935109 95% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 176.041082164 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.565217391304 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 448.2 506.74238477 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.0071563182 49.4020404114 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.642857143 106.682146367 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7142857143 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.1428571429 7.06120827912 158% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.224959954629 0.244688304435 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0785944772286 0.084324248473 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0458397442312 0.0667982634062 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131962432855 0.151304729494 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0487957964537 0.056905535591 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 78.4519038076 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.