As a result of a fast-paced life, fast food restaurants have grown steadily over the last decades. Many people prefer to eat a quick and cheap meal on the way home or during their break rather than cooking. Research have clearly demonstrated the risks and the detrimental effects this type of diet has on our health. Consequently, voices call for banning junk food advertising. Although avoiding this food is nothing short of a benefit, muting advertisement industry would not represent a sound solution.
Several diseases like diabetes, cardiovascular problems, and high pressure are related to a diet rich of fat and sugar. Although having lunch at a fast food restaurant seems to be an economical and quick alternative to cooking meals, this should not blind us of the hidden effects of this habit. Healthcare expenditure are reaching astronomical figures not only to face aging population but also to offer medical treatments for diseases related to junk food consumption. Prevention would be, therefore, the most powerful weapon to win obesity and urge people to embrace a healthier lifestyle which involves exercising and avoiding sugar.
Some go beyond it and demand a total ban of ads related to junk food. From my point of view, this is not the right approach to problem. We live in a free society where people should take responsibility of their own actions. Furthermore, advertisement is an industry employing thousands of writers, illustrators, and artists who may lost their job. We should also mention that in the last years fast food restaurants have begun to pay more attention to the quality of their products. Advertising has played a shaping role in this process, so banning ads can potentially have a detrimental effect on the food quality.
In conclusion, actions should be taken to improve a healthier lifestyle among people and inviting food providers to include fruit and vegetables in their meals. Banning ads would be the wrong way to tackle problems like obesity.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, if, may, so, therefore, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 13.1623246493 68% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1674.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 326.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13496932515 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24917287072 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89851818272 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 176.041082164 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.604294478528 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 508.5 506.74238477 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.3071048087 49.4020404114 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.4705882353 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1764705882 20.7667163134 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.17647058824 7.06120827912 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
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: 0.223679978736 0.244688304435 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0700438851547 0.084324248473 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0504543610553 0.0667982634062 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139177619894 0.151304729494 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0291144528335 0.056905535591 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.0946893788 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 12.47 12.4159519038 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 78.4519038076 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.