Some people say that to prevent illness and diseases, the government should focus more on reducing environmental pollution and housing problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There is an ongoing debate about the prevention of illness and diseases, with some arguing that the government's concentration should be primarily on limiting environmental pollution and accommodation issues. While I partly agree with this viewpoint, I firmly believe that prophylaxes should not be overlooked.

Granted, it is justifiable why some believe that governments should prioritize solving environmental pollution and housing problems. Regarding pollution, by enacting stricter regulations and imposing heavier taxes on companies that release harmful emissions, the governments can significantly reduce a large amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide emitted into the air. This, they say, can contribute to the reduction of health problems associated with respiratory ailments like asthma and bronchitis. Additionally, overcrowding and indecent living conditions could lead to easier spread of communicable diseases and mental health disorders. For example, in the slums of Mumbai city, when the improvements of housing conditions were implemented by the local authorities, it could positively reduce the incidences of communicable diseases and tuberculosis.

However, I side with proponents of the view that another sector, including prophylaxis, should take precedence when it comes to the government's priority for several reasons. Chief of these is the fact that no matter how less polluted a country is or how good the accommodation facilities are, if citizens are not diagnosed and treated at an early stage, they will fail to prevent the spread of diseases effectively. In light of this belief, governments should allocate more money not only to purchase more modern medical equipment but also reduce hospital fees or can be free in some cases. This can guarantee that everyone can access the basic healthcare system and reduce the costs of long-term care of affected patients as some diseases can be completely cured if it is detected early.

In conclusion, although the enhancement of housing conditions and the efforts of cutting down industrial emissions are beneficial to some extent. I am of the opinion that prophylaxes are much more efficient in this field, as prevention is better than treatment.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"There is an ongoing debate" -> "A longstanding debate exists"
Explanation: "A longstanding debate exists" is a more formal and precise way to introduce the topic, enhancing the academic tone of the essay.
"the government’s concentration" -> "the government’s focus"
Explanation: "Focus" is more specific and appropriate in this context, indicating a clear direction of effort, whereas "concentration" can imply a more general mental effort rather than a strategic direction.
"prophylaxes" -> "preventative measures"
Explanation: "Preventative measures" is a more commonly used and understood term in academic and formal contexts, whereas "prophylaxes" is less typical and may be confusing without context.
"it is justifiable why" -> "it is understandable why"
Explanation: "Understandable" is more appropriate in this context, as it implies a rational basis for the argument, whereas "justifiable" can imply moral or ethical justification, which may not be the intended meaning.
"a large amount of" -> "a significant amount of"
Explanation: "Significant" is more precise and academically formal than "large," which can be vague and less specific.
"atmospheric carbon dioxide" -> "atmospheric carbon dioxide emissions"
Explanation: Adding "emissions" clarifies the specific aspect of pollution being discussed, enhancing precision.
"can contribute to the reduction of health problems" -> "may contribute to reducing health problems"
Explanation: "May" is more cautious and academically appropriate than "can," which is somewhat vague and less formal. Also, "reducing" is a gerund form that flows better in this context.
"overcrowding and indecent living conditions" -> "overcrowding and substandard living conditions"
Explanation: "Substandard" is a more precise and formal term than "indecent," which can be misleading and inappropriate in this context.
"could positively reduce the incidences" -> "could effectively reduce the incidence"
Explanation: "Effectively" is more specific and academically appropriate than "positively," which can be seen as overly emotional or subjective.
"Chief of these is" -> "The primary reason is"
Explanation: "The primary reason is" is a clearer and more formal way to introduce the main point, avoiding the colloquial "Chief of these."
"less polluted a country is" -> "less polluted a country may be"
Explanation: "May be" is more appropriate as it acknowledges uncertainty and potential variability, aligning better with academic caution.
"reduce hospital fees or can be free in some cases" -> "reduce hospital fees or offer free services in some cases"
Explanation: "Offer free services" is more specific and formal than "can be free," which is vague and less formal.
"everyone can access the basic healthcare system" -> "all individuals have access to basic healthcare"
Explanation: "All individuals have access to" is more formal and precise, improving the academic tone.
"the enhancement of housing conditions and the efforts of cutting down industrial emissions" -> "the improvement of housing conditions and efforts to reduce industrial emissions"
Explanation: "Efforts to reduce" is more formal and precise than "the efforts of cutting down," which is awkward and less formal.
"prophylaxes are much more efficient" -> "preventative measures are significantly more effective"
Explanation: "Preventative measures are significantly more effective" uses more precise and formal language, enhancing the academic tone and clarity.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Task Response: 7

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay addresses the prompt by discussing both sides of the argument regarding whether the government should focus on reducing environmental pollution and housing problems to prevent illness and diseases. The writer acknowledges the importance of these factors while also emphasizing the need for preventive healthcare measures. However, the phrase "I partly agree" could imply a lack of clarity in the position taken, as it does not specify the extent of agreement or disagreement. The essay does not explicitly state whether the author believes one aspect is more important than the other, which is a critical element of the task.
- How to improve: To enhance the response to this criterion, the writer should clearly articulate their position on the extent of agreement or disagreement with the statement. This could be achieved by stating whether they believe that addressing environmental pollution and housing issues is equally important, more important, or less important than preventive healthcare measures.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a somewhat clear position, but the phrase "I partly agree" creates ambiguity. The writer’s stance is somewhat diluted by the introduction of the idea that both sides have merit. While the essay does attempt to present a balanced view, it lacks a definitive stance that would help guide the reader through the argument.
- How to improve: To maintain a clearer position, the writer should choose a definitive stance and consistently support it throughout the essay. This could involve stating a strong agreement or disagreement in the introduction and then reinforcing that position in each subsequent paragraph. Additionally, using phrases like "I strongly believe" or "I completely disagree" can help clarify the writer’s viewpoint.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents several relevant ideas, such as the impact of pollution on health and the importance of early diagnosis and treatment. However, some points could be more thoroughly developed. For instance, while the essay mentions the benefits of improving housing conditions, it could provide more specific examples or statistics to strengthen this argument. The discussion on prophylaxis is somewhat general and could benefit from more detailed examples or case studies.
- How to improve: To improve the presentation and support of ideas, the writer should aim to elaborate on key points with specific examples, data, or case studies. This could involve discussing successful public health campaigns, specific diseases that can be prevented through early diagnosis, or more detailed statistics on the health impacts of pollution and poor housing.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic, discussing the role of government in preventing illness and diseases through environmental and housing improvements, as well as preventive healthcare. However, there are moments where the focus shifts slightly, particularly in the conclusion, where the phrase "as prevention is better than treatment" could be seen as a general statement rather than a direct response to the prompt.
- How to improve: To maintain focus and relevance, the writer should ensure that all statements directly relate back to the prompt. In the conclusion, it would be beneficial to reiterate the main arguments made in the body of the essay and clearly link them back to the question of government priorities. This will help reinforce the essay’s relevance and coherence.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and presents relevant arguments, clarifying the position, providing more detailed support for ideas, and ensuring a strong focus on the prompt will enhance the overall quality and effectiveness of the response.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents a clear structure, with an introduction that outlines the topic and the writer’s stance. The body paragraphs are organized into two main arguments: one supporting the reduction of environmental pollution and housing issues, and the other advocating for the importance of prophylaxis. Each paragraph begins with a topic sentence that indicates the main idea, followed by supporting details. However, the transition between the two main arguments could be smoother. For instance, the shift from discussing pollution and housing to prophylaxis feels somewhat abrupt, which can disrupt the logical flow.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transitional phrases that signal a shift in focus, such as "On the other hand," or "Conversely," when moving from one argument to another. Additionally, ensuring that each paragraph builds on the previous one can help create a more cohesive narrative throughout the essay.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate different ideas, which is essential for clarity. Each paragraph is focused on a specific aspect of the argument, making it easier for the reader to follow the writer’s reasoning. However, the conclusion paragraph could be more robust. It briefly summarizes the points made but does not fully reinforce the argument or provide a strong final statement.
- How to improve: Strengthen the conclusion by summarizing the key points more thoroughly and reiterating the importance of the writer’s stance. A powerful concluding sentence that reflects on the broader implications of the argument can leave a lasting impression on the reader.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "Granted," "However," and "Additionally," which help to connect ideas and indicate relationships between them. However, the range of cohesive devices used is somewhat limited, and there are instances where the connections between sentences could be clearer. For example, the phrase "Chief of these is the fact that…" could be better integrated with the previous sentence to enhance flow.
- How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, incorporate a wider variety of linking words and phrases, such as "Furthermore," "Moreover," and "In contrast." Additionally, consider using pronouns or synonyms to refer back to previously mentioned ideas, which can help maintain coherence without repetitive phrasing.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of coherence and cohesion, there are areas for improvement that can elevate the writing to a higher band score. Focusing on smoother transitions, strengthening the conclusion, and diversifying cohesive devices will enhance the overall clarity and effectiveness of the argument presented.

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, with terms like "prophylaxes," "communicable diseases," and "indecent living conditions" showcasing the writer’s ability to use specific language relevant to the topic. However, some phrases could be more varied; for instance, the repeated use of "governments" could be replaced with synonyms such as "authorities" or "administrations" to enhance lexical diversity.
- How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate a broader array of synonyms and related terms throughout the essay. For example, instead of repeating "governments," they could use "policymakers" or "government bodies" in different sections. Additionally, including more descriptive adjectives or adverbs could enrich the text further.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally employs vocabulary accurately, but there are instances of imprecision. For example, the phrase "the improvements of housing conditions were implemented" could be more clearly stated as "improvements in housing conditions were implemented." Additionally, the term "prophylaxes" is somewhat formal and may not be the best choice for clarity in this context; "preventive measures" might be more accessible to a wider audience.
- How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should review their word choices for clarity and appropriateness. Using simpler, more commonly understood terms can help convey ideas more effectively. For instance, replacing "prophylaxes" with "preventive health measures" would maintain the intended meaning while improving clarity.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The spelling throughout the essay is largely accurate, with no significant errors noted. This demonstrates a strong command of spelling, which is crucial for achieving a higher band score.
- How to improve: To maintain and further improve spelling accuracy, the writer should continue to proofread their work carefully. Utilizing tools such as spell checkers or writing software can also help catch any overlooked errors. Additionally, regularly practicing spelling through writing exercises can reinforce correct spelling habits.

Overall, the essay displays a solid command of vocabulary with room for improvement in variety and precision. By diversifying word choice, ensuring clarity in vocabulary, and maintaining spelling accuracy, the writer can enhance their lexical resource score in future essays.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 8

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 8

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable variety of sentence structures. For instance, complex sentences such as "Granted, it is justifiable why some believe that governments should prioritize solving environmental pollution and housing problems" effectively convey nuanced ideas. Additionally, the use of conditional structures, as seen in "if citizens are not diagnosed and treated at an early stage, they will fail to prevent the spread of diseases effectively," showcases the writer’s ability to express hypothetical situations. However, the essay could benefit from more varied sentence openings and the inclusion of more compound-complex sentences to further enhance the sophistication of the writing.
- How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, consider incorporating more introductory phrases or clauses to vary the rhythm of the writing. For example, instead of starting sentences with the subject, try beginning with adverbial clauses or phrases, such as "In light of these challenges," or "Despite the advancements in healthcare," to create a more engaging flow. Additionally, integrating more compound-complex sentences can enhance the depth of the arguments presented.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a high level of grammatical accuracy, with only minor errors. For example, the phrase "the improvements of housing conditions were implemented" should be corrected to "the improvement of housing conditions was implemented" for subject-verb agreement. Punctuation is generally well-handled, with appropriate use of commas to separate clauses and enhance clarity. However, there are instances where punctuation could be refined, such as in the concluding sentence, where the phrase "to some extent" should be set off by commas for better readability.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, focus on subject-verb agreement and ensure that singular and plural forms are used correctly throughout the essay. Additionally, reviewing punctuation rules, particularly regarding the use of commas in complex sentences, will enhance clarity. For example, in the conclusion, rephrasing to "Although the enhancement of housing conditions and the efforts of cutting down industrial emissions are beneficial to some extent, I am of the opinion that prophylaxes are much more efficient in this field, as prevention is better than treatment," would improve the flow and clarity of the final statement. Regular practice with grammar exercises and proofreading can also help identify and correct these minor errors.

Bài sửa mẫu

There is an ongoing debate about the prevention of illness and diseases, with some arguing that the government’s focus should be primarily on reducing environmental pollution and housing problems. While I partly agree with this viewpoint, I firmly believe that preventative measures should not be overlooked.

Granted, it is understandable why some believe that governments should prioritize solving environmental pollution and housing problems. Regarding pollution, by enacting stricter regulations and imposing heavier taxes on companies that release harmful emissions, governments can significantly reduce a significant amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide emitted into the air. This, they say, may contribute to reducing health problems associated with respiratory ailments like asthma and bronchitis. Additionally, overcrowding and substandard living conditions could lead to an easier spread of communicable diseases and mental health disorders. For example, in the slums of Mumbai, when improvements in housing conditions were implemented by the local authorities, it could effectively reduce the incidence of communicable diseases and tuberculosis.

However, I side with proponents of the view that another sector, including preventative measures, should take precedence when it comes to the government’s priorities for several reasons. The primary reason is the fact that no matter how less polluted a country is or how good the accommodation facilities are, if citizens are not diagnosed and treated at an early stage, they will fail to prevent the spread of diseases effectively. In light of this belief, governments should allocate more money not only to purchase more modern medical equipment but also to reduce hospital fees or offer free services in some cases. This can guarantee that all individuals have access to basic healthcare and reduce the costs of long-term care for affected patients, as some diseases can be completely cured if they are detected early.

In conclusion, although the improvement of housing conditions and efforts to reduce industrial emissions are beneficial to some extent, I am of the opinion that preventative measures are much more effective in this field, as prevention is better than treatment.