Throughout the world, food nutrition has never ceased to draw public attention and provoke debates. Although there are numerous people eating at restaurants, the issue as to whether all restaurants should provide nutritional information of the food they serve or not remains controversial. In my opinion, the advantages of showing those information to diners far outweigh the disadvantages.
Firstly, it is important to recognise that people are exhausted after working 9 to 5 and they would rather eat at restaurants than cook dinner at home. Many may argue that busy citizens are too hungry so they might ignore the ingredients of the food. This argument could be true to some extent. However, they should take into account the fact that people care about diet-related health problems such as obesity or diabetes, therefore diners would have the need to know more about nutritional information and welcome the law that requiring restaurants display those information on the menu. For example, FDA enacted a new law and those restaurants which have more than 20 locations must provide calorie-count on their food items in 2018. This example indicates that legislators want to reduce food-related health issues.
Secondly, it is equally important to recognise that restaurants have been spending a large amount of time to prepare the ingredients and serve food. Economists may argue that it would take more time and effort for restaurants to show detail nutritional information for every meal they serve. As a result, they have to devote an amount of budget on extra effort. Nevertheless, they are ignorant of the fact that disclosure information of food nutrition not only benefits customers but also positively affect the restaurants. For instance, McDonald’s had seen increased stock and restaurant sales after providing calorie-count on the menus in 2016. Therefore, this could make restaurants different from their counterparts and attract more customers.
In conclusion, taking all of the above mentioned facts, it is reasonable to display food nutrition to diners therefore they could have nutritious diets and decrease health problems.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 169, Rule ID: WHETHER[6]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "as to"?
Suggestion: whether
...people eating at restaurants, the issue as to whether all restaurants should provide nutritio...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 332, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this information' or 'those informations'?
Suggestion: this information; those informations
...n my opinion, the advantages of showing those information to diners far outweigh the disadvantage...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 153, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun may seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much may', 'a good deal of may'.
Suggestion: Much may; A good deal of may
...t restaurants than cook dinner at home. Many may argue that busy citizens are too hungry...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 560, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this information' or 'those informations'?
Suggestion: this information; those informations
... law that requiring restaurants display those information on the menu. For example, FDA enacted a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 23, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ore customers. In conclusion, taking all of the above mentioned facts, it is reasonable...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, as to, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.5258426966 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 58.6224719101 70% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1825.0 2235.4752809 82% => OK
No of words: 335.0 442.535393258 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44776119403 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27820116611 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00188401523 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 215.323595506 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.570149253731 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 557.1 704.065955056 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.1925202714 60.3974514979 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.0625 118.986275619 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9375 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0 5.21951772744 211% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.346800687976 0.243740707755 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100952556881 0.0831039109588 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0723673073158 0.0758088955206 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202055668729 0.150359130593 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0453889247348 0.0667264976115 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.1392134831 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.33 12.1639044944 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 100.480337079 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.