Governments should make laws about people’s nutrition and food choice. Others argue that it is their choice. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
One school of thought holds that it is appropriate for the governments to enforce laws on the people’s selection of food and nutritional values. While I accept this perception as somewhat justifiable, I would stand on the opposite view with the idea of respect to personal preferences.
On the one hand, the way governments implement laws on food choice can bring a potential benefit to the residents on controlling their eating habits and creating healthier diets. This argument means that lawmakers can set a standard intake of essential nutrition as advised by scientists and nutritionists, therefore can lessen the amount of packaged and fast food that each person consumes daily. As a result, if someone resists this kind of law they might have to pay a little money
while companies who sell unlisted food that was encouraged by a nutritionist will be banned from operating. Therefore, the money that has to be paid can be put into the public fund to contribute to building more and more eating habits campaigns that can raise people’s awareness about the importance of having legislation on food selections.
On the other hand, there are myriads of compelling reasons as I am convinced that it is of paramount importance for people to let them freely choose their food products to fit with their interests. Firstly, the people’s food choices are based on their financial basements and their taste preferences. For example, several people decide to go to McDonald's because they like the cheesy taste and the feeling of satisfying their tongue when they have their first bite of the grilled meat. Moreover, someone has only the option to pay for a meal in local street food because they can not afford an expensive diet meal. Secondly, enforcing laws on food choices somewhat affects people's rights and is simply unethical.
In conclusion, although I accept that laws can help each person know more about the vitality of having a balanced eating diet. I believe that two main reasons that come from people’s purposes and human rights determine that it is inappropriate to enforce regulation on food choices.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, as to, for example, in conclusion, kind of, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 24.0651302605 141% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1782.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 351.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07692307692 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32839392791 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77281022693 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.555555555556 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 537.3 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => 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: 27.0 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 41.4403399497 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.076923077 106.682146367 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0 20.7667163134 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.4615384615 7.06120827912 162% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => 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: 0.259517853734 0.244688304435 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.100246513907 0.084324248473 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0695354236642 0.0667982634062 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131150060104 0.151304729494 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0554449577929 0.056905535591 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.0946893788 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 50.2224549098 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.16 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 9.78957915832 138% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.