SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT REGULATE THE FAST FOOD INDUSTRY IN THE SAME WAY THAT REGULATES THE DRUG, ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO INDUSTRIES?

Some people argue that the authorities ought to enact laws about fast food trade similar to the regulation of utilizing drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. From my perspectives, there are many factors why I do not approve of this view.

First of all, fast food is so convenient for quick meals. These kinds of food help consumers save time to make use of time for doing other things. Interestingly, fast food is appropriate for most groups of ages, which looks appetizing and eye-catching. In fact, these days many young generations choose to visit fast food stores like Jollibee or KFC primarily because of busy days with deadlines. They need to dine out a hamburger and slices of sandwiches in order to have instant energy to go back to work. Moreover, it is unnecessary to clean up the dishes or cook a meal.

Another important point is that fast food is less harmful than drugs, alcohol or tobacco. It is true that the components of soft drinks, hamburgers, pizzas or many other junk foods contain a variety of carbohydrates, salt, and glucose. Provided that diners eat too much and do not burn calories, which is prone to some health risks like obesity and digestive disorder. On the other hand, abusing drugs, alcohol and tobacco could cause some fatal illnesses. In reality, a cigarette has an extreme poisonous substance called nicotine, which is one of the prime justifications, drive smokers to lung cancer. Furthermore, most drug addicts often have some criminal behaviors, affecting negatively to the safety of the whole society like robbing or killing to take properties illegally.

In conclusion, despite the drawbacks of fast food, the advantages of them still outweigh drugs. It genuinely has injustice when adjusting rules of fast food’s consumption and trade.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"From my perspectives" -> "From my perspective"
Explanation: The phrase "From my perspectives" is grammatically incorrect. "Perspective" should be used in the singular form to match the subject "my."
"many factors why I do not approve of this view" -> "numerous reasons why I disagree with this perspective"
Explanation: "Many factors why I do not approve of this view" is awkward and lacks precision. Replacing it with "numerous reasons why I disagree with this perspective" improves clarity and formality.
"fast food is so convenient for quick meals" -> "fast food offers convenience for rapid meals"
Explanation: While "so convenient" is overly informal, "offers convenience" maintains formality. Additionally, "rapid meals" is more precise than "quick meals."
"make use of time for doing other things" -> "allocate time for other activities"
Explanation: "Make use of time for doing other things" is wordy and awkward. "Allocate time for other activities" is more concise and formal.
"looks appetizing and eye-catching" -> "appears appetizing and visually appealing"
Explanation: "Looks" is too informal for academic writing. "Appears appetizing and visually appealing" maintains formality and clarity.
"young generations" -> "young individuals" or "young people"
Explanation: "Young generations" is not idiomatic. "Young individuals" or "young people" are more appropriate in academic writing.
"to dine out a hamburger and slices of sandwiches" -> "to consume hamburgers and sandwiches"
Explanation: "To dine out a hamburger and slices of sandwiches" is awkward and unclear. "To consume hamburgers and sandwiches" is more direct and formal.
"have instant energy to go back to work" -> "regain energy to return to work"
Explanation: "Have instant energy to go back to work" is informal. "Regain energy to return to work" maintains formality and clarity.
"it is unnecessary to clean up the dishes or cook a meal" -> "there is no need to wash dishes or prepare a meal"
Explanation: "It is unnecessary to clean up the dishes or cook a meal" is wordy and lacks precision. "There is no need to wash dishes or prepare a meal" is more concise and formal.
"less harmful than drugs, alcohol or tobacco" -> "less detrimental than drugs, alcohol, or tobacco"
Explanation: "Less harmful" is overly simplistic for academic writing. "Less detrimental" is a more sophisticated alternative.
"the components of soft drinks, hamburgers, pizzas or many other junk foods contain a variety of carbohydrates, salt, and glucose" -> "soft drinks, hamburgers, pizzas, and many other junk foods contain various carbohydrates, salt, and glucose"
Explanation: The original phrase lacks parallel structure and is somewhat awkward. By rephrasing it to "soft drinks, hamburgers, pizzas, and many other junk foods contain various carbohydrates, salt, and glucose," the sentence becomes clearer and more formal.
"Provided that diners eat too much and do not burn calories" -> "If diners consume excessively and do not burn calories"
Explanation: "Provided that" is overly formal for this context. "If diners consume excessively and do not burn calories" is a more natural and clear alternative.
"prone to some health risks like obesity and digestive disorder" -> "prone to health risks such as obesity and digestive disorders"
Explanation: "Prone to some health risks like obesity and digestive disorder" is imprecise. "Prone to health risks such as obesity and digestive disorders" is clearer and more formal.
"drive smokers to lung cancer" -> "lead to lung cancer in smokers"
Explanation: "Drive smokers to lung cancer" is an awkward construction. "Lead to lung cancer in smokers" is more concise and clear.
"some fatal illnesses" -> "serious or life-threatening illnesses"
Explanation: "Some fatal illnesses" is vague. "Serious or life-threatening illnesses" is more specific and formal.
"extreme poisonous substance" -> "highly toxic substance"
Explanation: "Extreme poisonous substance" is not a common phrase. "Highly toxic substance" is more precise and formal.
"prime justifications" -> "primary factors" or "main reasons"
Explanation: "Prime justifications" is an unusual phrase. "Primary factors" or "main reasons" are more standard alternatives.
"the safety of the whole society like robbing or killing to take properties illegally" -> "public safety, such as robbery or murder for unlawful acquisition of property"
Explanation: "The safety of the whole society like robbing or killing to take properties illegally" is unclear and awkward. "Public safety, such as robbery or murder for unlawful acquisition of property" is more precise and formal.
"the advantages of them still outweigh drugs" -> "the benefits of fast food still outweigh those of drugs"
Explanation: "The advantages of them still outweigh drugs" is unclear. "The benefits of fast food still outweigh those of drugs" is more precise and formal.
"It genuinely has injustice when adjusting rules of fast food’s consumption and trade." -> "It would be unjust to regulate the consumption and trade of fast food in the same manner."
Explanation: "It genuinely has injustice when adjusting rules of fast food’s consumption and trade" is awkward and unclear. "It would be unjust to regulate the consumption and trade of fast food in the same manner" is clearer and more formal.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay adequately addresses all parts of the prompt by discussing whether the government should regulate the fast food industry similarly to how it regulates the drug, alcohol, and tobacco industries. The author provides reasons why they disagree with this notion.
- How to improve: To further enhance task response, the author could consider providing a more balanced discussion by acknowledging potential arguments in favor of regulating the fast food industry and addressing them in the essay.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The author maintains a clear position throughout the essay, expressing their disagreement with regulating the fast food industry like drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. This stance is evident from the introduction to the conclusion.
- How to improve: To strengthen the clarity of the position, the author could explicitly state their thesis in the introduction and reinforce it throughout the essay by consistently referring back to their stance.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas about the convenience and perceived benefits of fast food, contrasting them with the harms of drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. However, the development and support of these ideas lack depth and specificity. For instance, while the essay mentions health risks associated with fast food, it does not delve into specific examples or provide evidence to support these claims.
- How to improve: To improve this aspect, the author should provide more detailed examples and evidence to support their arguments. Incorporating statistics, studies, or real-life examples would strengthen the essay’s credibility and persuasive power.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay mostly stays on topic by addressing the question of whether the government should regulate the fast food industry like it does with drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. However, there are some instances where the discussion veers off track, such as when the essay compares the harms of fast food to those of drugs and tobacco without directly addressing the regulatory aspect.
- How to improve: To maintain focus, the author should ensure that every point made directly relates to the comparison between regulating the fast food industry and regulating drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. Avoiding tangential discussions would help strengthen the essay’s coherence and relevance to the prompt.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a clear position and attempts to address the prompt, there is room for improvement in providing more thorough analysis, supporting arguments with evidence, and maintaining focus on the topic throughout.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a basic level of logical organization. Each paragraph presents a separate point of view, with the first paragraph introducing arguments against regulating the fast food industry and the second paragraph presenting reasons why fast food is considered less harmful than drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. However, there is room for improvement in the transition between paragraphs to create a smoother flow of ideas. Additionally, some points within paragraphs could be better connected to enhance coherence.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases or sentences to connect ideas between paragraphs. For instance, in the transition from discussing the convenience of fast food to its perceived harmlessness compared to drugs, alcohol, and tobacco, a sentence could be added to bridge the gap and clarify the shift in focus. Within paragraphs, ensure that each supporting point is clearly linked back to the main argument to maintain coherence and cohesion throughout the essay.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively utilizes paragraphs to organize ideas, with each paragraph focusing on a specific aspect of the argument. However, the structure of some paragraphs could be improved to enhance clarity and coherence. For example, the second paragraph could be divided into two separate paragraphs to distinguish between the points about convenience and perceived harmlessness of fast food.
- How to improve: Consider breaking longer paragraphs into smaller ones to provide clearer transitions between ideas and improve readability. By separating distinct points into individual paragraphs, the essay can maintain focus and coherence within each section, making it easier for the reader to follow the argument.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs a limited range of cohesive devices to connect ideas and create coherence. Some examples of cohesive devices used include transition words like "first of all," "moreover," and "on the other hand." However, there is a lack of variety in cohesive devices, which affects the overall coherence and cohesion of the essay.
- How to improve: To enhance cohesion, diversify the use of cohesive devices beyond transitional words to include pronouns, repetition, and parallel structure. Additionally, consider using cohesive devices within and between paragraphs to create stronger connections between ideas and improve the flow of the essay. For example, replacing repetitive phrases with pronouns or using parallel structure to emphasize similarities or contrasts between arguments can enhance cohesion and clarity.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 7

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good range of vocabulary that is mostly appropriate for the topic, such as "regulation," "components," "digestive disorder," and "criminal behaviors." The use of phrases like "prime justifications" and "extreme poisonous substance" adds a certain level of sophistication to the text. The writer’s attempt to vary their language is evident, which supports the band score of 7.
- How to improve: To further enhance the range of vocabulary, the candidate could benefit from using more specific and varied terms related to the topic. For example, instead of general terms like "harmful," more precise language such as "detrimental health effects" could be used. Additionally, incorporating synonyms and paraphrases more frequently would avoid repetition and demonstrate greater lexical flexibility.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay shows instances of precise vocabulary usage, particularly with terms specific to the subject matter, such as "nicotine," "lung cancer," and "obesity." However, there are moments where the word choice could be more accurate to improve clarity, such as "fast food trade" which might be better expressed as "fast food industry."
- How to improve: Focus on contextually appropriate vocabulary by ensuring that the chosen words convey the exact intended meaning. For example, the phrase "looks appetizing and eye-catching" could be replaced with "is visually appealing and enticing to diverse age groups," which more accurately captures the positive aspects of fast food. Usage of terminology more specific to the regulation aspect, like "statutory controls" or "legislative measures," could also enhance precision.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay predominantly exhibits correct spelling, which is an essential component for achieving a band 7. The accurate spelling of complex terms such as "components," "digestive," and "behavior" indicates a strong grasp of English spelling conventions.
- How to improve: Continuous reading and writing are effective ways to maintain and improve spelling proficiency. Utilizing spell check tools before finalizing an essay can also help catch any unnoticed errors. Engaging with a variety of texts can expose the learner to different words, reinforcing correct spelling patterns and usage.

Overall, the essay reaches a band 7 in Lexical Resource by demonstrating a generally effective command of vocabulary and spelling, though there is room for improvement in terms of precision and variability. To aim for a higher band score, the writer should focus on enhancing the precision of vocabulary to better align with the context and further diversifying their lexical choices to avoid repetition and demonstrate a broader lexical repertoire.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 6

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a moderate range of sentence structures. Simple, compound, and complex sentences are utilized, albeit somewhat repetitively. For instance, there is a prevalent use of simple sentences throughout the essay, such as "First of all, fast food is so convenient for quick meals." Although a few attempts at complex structures are made, like "Despite the drawbacks of fast food, the advantages of them still outweigh drugs," they are not consistently employed.
- How to improve: To enhance the grammatical range and variety, the writer should strive for more complex sentence structures. Incorporating compound-complex sentences, using introductory phrases or clauses, and varying sentence lengths can contribute to a more sophisticated writing style. Additionally, employing rhetorical devices like parallelism or inversion can add flair to the essay.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates a reasonable level of grammatical accuracy, but there are several instances of grammatical errors and punctuation mistakes. For example, "the regulation of utilizing drugs" could be revised to "regulating the use of drugs." Additionally, there are errors in subject-verb agreement, such as "fast food is appropriate for most groups of ages," where "groups" should be "age groups."
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, the writer should pay close attention to subject-verb agreement, verb tense consistency, and the appropriate use of articles. Proofreading the essay carefully before submission can help identify and correct such errors. Additionally, studying grammar rules and practicing writing with a focus on accuracy can enhance proficiency. Utilizing tools like grammar checkers can also be beneficial in identifying and rectifying errors.

Bài sửa mẫu

Some individuals advocate for government regulations on the fast food industry akin to those governing drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. From my perspective, there are numerous reasons why I disagree with this perspective.

To begin with, fast food offers convenience for rapid meals, allowing consumers to allocate time for other activities. The visually appealing nature of these meals attracts individuals of all ages, particularly young people facing busy schedules and looming deadlines. Opting for fast food like hamburgers and sandwiches provides a quick energy boost to return to work, eliminating the need to wash dishes or prepare a meal.

Moreover, it’s essential to recognize that fast food is generally less detrimental than drugs, alcohol, or tobacco. While soft drinks, hamburgers, pizzas, and many other junk foods contain various carbohydrates, salt, and glucose, excessive consumption without calorie expenditure can lead to health risks such as obesity and digestive disorders. However, the adverse effects of drug, alcohol, and tobacco abuse can result in serious or life-threatening illnesses. For instance, nicotine, a highly toxic substance found in cigarettes, is a primary factor contributing to lung cancer in smokers. Additionally, individuals addicted to drugs often engage in criminal activities, posing risks to public safety such as robbery or murder for unlawful acquisition of property.

In conclusion, despite the drawbacks of fast food, the benefits of its consumption still outweigh those of drugs. It would be unjust to regulate the consumption and trade of fast food in the same manner as drugs, alcohol, and tobacco.