Are governments doing well in educating people to pay attention to the importance of the food nutrition and healthy eating?
In recent decades, the growth of population has caused the introduction of inorganic and unhealthy foods to the societies. States have adopted several techniques to increase public awareness of junk foods. The controversial question which arises here regarding this concept is whether or not authorities have succeeded in educating people about harmful foods. I am of the opinion that governments have indeed done well on this path. In what follows, I will elaborate on my viewpoint.
First of all, countries have used different media to increase public knowledge about their diet. Television shows, Internet blogs, banners around the city, to name but a few, play a crucial role in informing people about the food products. Not only do they provide the amounts of nutrients in foods, but they also exhibit harmful and beneficial foods. For instance, last week, TV was showing a program about the effects of red meat on our health. According to the show, eating excessive red meat causes blood pressure disease in the future, and makes us more aggressive. Also, eating green foods like vegetables reduces our stress. It may be evident that foods containing meat are harmful to our bodies, and everybody knows that. However, the program stated the results of conducted research that the average age of people who have more green diets is approximately five years greater than others. Following that time, thanks to the show, we have used less meat in our meals and instead have eaten more vegetative foods.
Secondly, by enforcing special laws, states have forced food industries to inform customers from quality of their products. Today, all of the ingredients available in stores have specified their compositions and food values. Also, food products have labeled so that people find their overall effect on their well-being easily. Moreover, authorities have set high penalties for the companies not providing these labels or manipulate them. They have used the charges to increase the students’ knowledge of illnesses corresponding to the foods in schools. For instance, last week, I read an article in the newspaper about a cooking-oil company that had manipulated their products’ labels. Authorities had researched and found that they were giving wrong information about their goods, so the state penalized the company for a considerable payment. Had the government not care about informing the society from their diet, it wouldn’t have done examinations to ensure food commodities with accurate labels.
In short, taking all the aforementioned reasons into account, one can readily conclude that states did an excellent job of informing people about their diet. Using various kinds of media to convey their message, coupled with making useful laws, are the reasons which strengthen my point of view.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 278, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...h arises here regarding this concept is whether or not authorities have succeeded in educating...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 132, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... from quality of their products. Today, all of the ingredients available in stores have sp...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, well, for instance, in short, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 9.8082437276 31% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 43.0788530466 93% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 52.1666666667 113% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2389.0 1977.66487455 121% => OK
No of words: 447.0 407.700716846 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34451901566 4.8611393121 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59808378696 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7500750138 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 259.0 212.727598566 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579418344519 0.524837075471 110% => OK
syllable_count: 726.3 618.680645161 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.6003584229 117% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.320808667 48.9658058833 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.5416666667 100.406767564 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.625 20.6045352989 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.29166666667 5.45110844103 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.123834558479 0.236089414692 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0383834169285 0.076458572812 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0373680205244 0.0737576698707 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0742904726169 0.150856017488 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0314323156493 0.0645574589148 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 10.9000537634 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.01818996416 115% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 86.8835125448 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.