Câu hỏi:
07/01/2025 303More and more people are becoming seriously overweight. Some people think a solution can be to increase the price of fattening foods. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Câu hỏi trong đề: 2000 câu trắc nghiệm tổng hợp Tiếng Anh 2025 có đáp án !!
Quảng cáo
Trả lời:
Sample 1:
In today’s society, the issue of obesity is becoming increasingly prevalent, with more and more people struggling with serious weight problems. Some individuals argue that the solution lies in raising the price of fattening foods. I completely agree with this viewpoint, and this essay will elaborate on my reasons.
Firstly, increasing the price of unhealthy, weight-inducing food items can discourage excessive consumption and encourage individuals to opt for healthier alternatives. When unhealthy food items become more expensive, people are more likely to reconsider their choices and seek out more nutritious options. For instance, if the cost of a sugary beverage is significantly higher than that of a bottle of water, individuals may be more inclined to choose the latter, thereby reducing their calorie intake. By creating a financial disincentive for unhealthy food choices, people are more likely to make healthier decisions for the benefit of their well-being.
Secondly, raising the price of fatty foods can help offset the societal costs associated with obesity. Obesity not only takes a toll on individuals’ health but also places a burden on healthcare systems and economies. By increasing the price of unhealthy foods, the revenue generated can be allocated towards initiatives and programs aimed at promoting public health and preventing obesity. This could include funding educational campaigns, subsidizing healthier food options, and supporting fitness and wellness programs. Ultimately, the financial resources generated from higher prices can be reinvested into combating obesity and creating a healthier society.
In conclusion, I firmly support the idea of increasing the prices of fattening foods as a solution to the growing issue of obesity, given how this policy can discourage excessive consumption and promote healthier choices among consumers, and how the additional revenue generated can be utilized to fund obesity prevention programs and alleviate the societal costs linked with this pressing health concern.
Sample 2:
There could be said to be an increasing number of individuals who are becoming obese. Recent policy decisions have proposed that a price hike on fattening foods be implemented in order to dissuade people from consuming them and thereby curbing the obesity epidemic. I personally think that while this measure might help, it would not be nearly as effective as other measures such as portion control.
Whilst there is no doubt in my mind that making fattening sugary foods more expensive would certainly curb the rise in obesity, it is still uncertain that it would necessarily be as effective as we might expect due to the price inelasticity of fast-food products. Some might state the law of supply and demand as a reason why we might expect sugary food consumption to decrease when prices rise, but behavioral economics might propose that people would be more than eager to hand over more money for the fattening foods that they enjoy. This is why other addictive substances such as cigarettes, for example, have also been shown to be somewhat immune to price increases.
Furthermore, a larger issue may actually be portion control, as having larger portions in each meal could actually encourage people to eat more. Particularly in fast food chains, food portions are exorbitantly large leading to each meal being calorically higher than normal meals. If portions are decreased for every meal, even if the price is lowered, it could lead to people consuming less calories per meal and thus becoming less obese. Studies have shown that by making bowls smaller, for example, individuals also consume less food. If governments apply this method to fast food restaurants, it could potentially decrease obesity rates more effectively than price hikes could.
Overall, I argue that whilst increasing the price of fattening foods might help to a degree, I argue that other options such as portion control might be more effective.
Sample 3:
An alarming rate of obesity in many countries has raised great concern regarding the potential for charging a higher price on fattening foods to alleviate this healthcare problem. In my view, while I partly agree with the notion that a rise in unhealthy food costs can address the issue due to its short-term effect, I firmly believe that public campaigns can be a more viable and sustainable solution.
There is no denying that pricing fattening foods at a higher cost can demonstrate some effectiveness in reducing the risk of obesity. That is to say, if cholesterol-rich burgers or sugary sodas are priced at a premium, these items will become less affordable for consumers to purchase, therefore reducing the likelihood of being overweight in the general population. However, it is important to recognise that this pricing method may be limited due to the enduring appeal of high-fat and high-sugar foods, such as fries or doughnuts. In other words, the irresistible temptation posed by these unhealthy processed foods may compel consumers, especially those who regularly indulge in snacking, to continue making purchases, regardless of their unreasonably high price.
Alternatively, other measures with far-reaching impacts should be given greater consideration. One of the most effective and sustainable approaches to combating obesity is to implement comprehensive public campaigns. These government-operated education programmes promise to reshape community awareness and attitudes towards foods high in cholesterol and sugar and the associated health risks. Moreover, including public consultations with nutrition experts can provide valuable insights into a healthy and balanced diet. By gradually transitioning from fat-heavy to more nourishing food options, individuals can make better-informed choices for their daily diet, leading to a significant decrease in obesity rates over the long run.
In conclusion, I partly agree with the implementation of increased costs for fattening foods, as it can fall short due to the strong craving for snacking in many individuals. Instead, public healthcare education involving nutritionists can hold greater value in addressing the issue of overweight, thanks to its long-term impact on educating the community about proper nutrition.
Sample 4:
As a large number of people are suffering from severe obesity in many countries around the world, various proposals to alleviate this issue have been put forward. Among them, the idea of increasing the cost of fatty foods is being considered. In my perspective, although this suggestion can be effective for the impoverished demographic, it may only partially solve such a complicated problem.
The most compelling explanation is that this practice can be a surefire way to reduce fattening food consumption. A surge in the price of a product in this case, fatty foods can potentially discourage consumers from purchasing it. As a result, this change may promote healthier food options when people stop consuming greasy meals and opt for a more nutritious diet, leading to a drop in obesity rates. However, this measure may have little to no effect on wealthy buyers who can afford those foods regardless of prices. In other words, it is likely that only the less financially privileged classes are influenced by the price hike in high-fat food.
More importantly, the suggestion to inflate the cost of fatty meals may fail to address this health crisis as there are various factors resulting in weight gain. It is true that some people can be overweight due to either their metabolism or their lack of exercise. Regarding the former, even if those with fast metabolism eat less food containing a lot of fat, there is a high chance that they still gain weight as they need to consume a larger portion of food. Similarly, people leading a sedentary lifestyle may still find it challenging to lose weight as they usually do not participate in any physical activities to burn calories, irrespective of the number of fatty meals they have.
In conclusion, for the foregoing discussions, it can be argued that while the rise in fattening food prices can be a viable solution to a certain extent, other measures need to be taken to comprehensively mitigate the roots of obesity.
Sample 5:
The increasing prevalence of obesity worldwide has led some people to propose that the price of high-fat foods should be increased to address the issue. While I agree that raising the cost of unhealthy food items might have some positive impacts on curbing obesity rates, I believe that more comprehensive solutions are necessary.
Raising the price of fattening foods could be an effective deterrent for some individuals due to the basic economic principle of supply and demand. By making unhealthy foods more expensive, the government can encourage people to seek healthier and more cost-effective alternatives, thus promoting better eating habits. This approach has already been implemented in some countries, such as Mexico and Hungary, through taxes on sugary drinks and junk food, with some partial success. However, I am unconvinced that this strategy alone can significantly reduce obesity rates, as it does not address the root causes of poor dietary choices and sedentary lifestyles.
To me, a more holistic approach to combating the rising number of overweight individuals would involve implementing educational programs and promoting physical activity. Education plays a crucial role in informing the public about proper nutrition and the dangers of excessive weight gain, empowering people to make better choices. This can be achieved by incorporating nutrition education into school curriculums, offering community workshops, and using public health campaigns to raise awareness. In addition, creating safe and accessible spaces for physical activity, such as parks and recreational facilities, can inspire people to adopt more active lifestyles. Similarly, public policies that support the development of bike lanes, pedestrian-friendly streets, and subsidized sports programs can contribute to fostering a culture of health and fitness.
In conclusion, while increasing the price of fattening foods may be a useful tool in the fight against obesity, it is not a comprehensive solution to the problem. From my perspective, A multifaceted approach, including education and promotion of physical activity, should be prioritized to effectively address this alarming health crisis.
Sample 6:
The prevalence of severe obesity is on the rise, prompting the suggestion that raising the cost of high-calorie foods could be a potential solution. However, I believe this suggestion may not lead to a significant reduction in obesity rates for two main reasons.
To begin with, although prices do impact the accessibility of high-calorie foods, they do not solely determine people’s choices to consume such foods. The hectic lifestyle that characterises modern society also significantly influences these decisions. Given the quick and easy availability of fattening foods, they often become the go-to choice for many individuals, including office workers and students, seeking the convenience that aligns with their busy schedules. Another crucial aspect is emotional eating, whereby the consumption of calorie-dense foods triggers the release of brain chemicals like dopamine, providing temporary mood enhancement. Consequently, individuals may turn to these foods as a coping mechanism to address negative emotions such as stress, anxiety, boredom, or sadness, regardless of their prices. Hence, even if the prices of fattening foods were to rise, individuals who are constrained by time and those seeking emotional solace would still gravitate towards consuming them.
Furthermore, it is crucial to recognize that weight gain is not solely attributed to consuming fattening foods. Obesity stems from various underlying causes. Firstly, a lack of physical activity and a sedentary lifestyle can significantly contribute to weight gain. When individuals engage in limited physical activity, their calorie expenditure decreases, leading to the accumulation of excess body fat. Additionally, genetic factors play a role in an individual’s predisposition to obesity. People with a family history of obesity may face greater challenges in managing their weight. Therefore, simply focusing on reducing the consumption of fattening foods would be insufficient in effectively addressing the issue.
In conclusion, I strongly disagree with the notion that merely increasing the prices of calorie-dense foods would effectively resolve the issue of severe obesity. This approach falls short in addressing both the individual choices made and the fundamental causes contributing to obesity.
Sample 7:
As is known to all, the problem of obesity is haunting the public, with an increasing number of overweight populations nowadays. While some people opine that increasing the price of fattening food can be an effective solution, I would argue that the other means can better fundamentally address the issue.
Admittedly, raising the price of food, especially those directly related to corpulence, can refrain people’s purchase desire to some extent. Considering relatively higher costs for such kind of fattening food, such as burgers and cakes, residents may reduce consumption gradually, therefore leading to less fatty food lovers and accordingly a less overweight population in the long run.
However, this solution can hardly uproot the obesity issue since it is impossible to stop public’s crazy pursuits for fattening food when they have not raised the consciousness of healthy lifestyle. Under the circumstances, higher prices merely exert considerable pressure on ordinary customers, rather than achieve the goal of dealing with the problem. Therefore, enhancing public awareness can radically play a pivotal role in tackling the obesity issue. For one thing, through non-commercial advertising on TV shows, busy office workers can be motivated to exercise on a regular basis, which is an effective method to promote healthy lifestyles. For another, holding lectures on mental health is also crucial for the public to change their mindset and get rid of overweight problems caused by excessive living stress. If they are able to relieve their pressure through adopting other efficient measures, fatty food is no longer the kind of pleasure they can hardly abandon.
In conclusion, although pricey fattening food can partly help resolve the obesity problem, people should change their lifestyles and mindsets to fully eradicate the issue.
Sample 8:
The fact that the number of obese people is on the rise has become a concerning issue for the public. While many argue that higher prices on fattening foods can considerably address this issue, I somewhat contend that there are more effective and sustainable solutions to the problem.
I concede that raising the prices of fattening foods can discourage their consumption to a certain extent. When faced with expensive prices of such products, people tend to turn to more affordable, healthier alternatives like vegetables, fruits and home-cooked meals. This is particularly relevant during the recent economic recession when the majority of consumers are prioritising budget-friendly options. By reducing the intake of unhealthy food and embracing a healthier diet, people can lower the risks of becoming overweight as well as developing diseases associated with it as a result.
However, I consider that increasing fattening food prices alone has limited impacts on combating the issue. It is widely acknowledged that besides food-related factors, sedentary behaviours also contribute to overweight problems. If people were to reduce their intake of fast food without adopting an active lifestyle, the overall improvement in their health would be minimal. Moreover, for those who are heavily reliant on junk food, this approach can be seen as unfair and could potentially lead to social discontent within this group.
Therefore, I believe that to effectively and sustainably tackle the issue, a multifaceted approach is needed. Organising free educational workshops and programs can help raise awareness about the detrimental effects of unhealthy food while highlighting the impressive benefits of highly nutritious products. Equipped with such in-depth knowledge, people tend to become more conscious about the food they consume on a daily basis. Providing accessible places to engage people in regular exercises is another beneficial approach. Constructing more parks and sport centres, for example, is a real necessity that motivates people to incorporate physical activities into their daily routines.
In conclusion, while raising prices on high-fat food may help lower the possibility of becoming overweight, it is not a comprehensive initiative. I mostly believe that a holistic solution to this problem should involve educational campaigns about food consumption and the development of exercise facilities.
Sample 9:
In the light of the current rise in the number of obese people, some suggest that increasing the price of high-fat foods can be an effective solution. I mostly agree with this suggestion given the fact that it holds the potential to decrease the consumption of these foods although it may fail to tackle the factor regarding inactive lifestyles that contribute to obesity.
My first rationale is that an increase in the price of fatty foods can demotivate potential customers. It is true that many buyers are sensitive to changes in prices, thus an increase in the cost of fat-laden options is likely to discourage their purchase. This price surge will prompt individuals to reduce the frequency and quantity of their purchases, reducing the overall consumption and eventually the likelihood of obesity.
Additional reasoning for my support of the price increase is that a major contributor to the rise in the consumption of fattening dishes is the appealing advertising campaigns. These are often run by restaurants and other food providers to boost their sales. However, the drop in consumption resulting from the rise in product prices will make these businesses less profitable, forcing them to cut down their budget on these campaigns. Consequently, with fewer advertisements promoting high-fat foods, less people will be tempted into buying and consuming them.
However, I concede that higher prices for affected foods might not be an ultimately effective solution to the issue of obesity. This is primarily due to the fact that people can still become obese when consuming fewer fatty foods, if they embrace the sedentary lifestyle which involves a minimum amount of physical activity that helps burn the excess fat in their body.
In conclusion, I mostly agree with the idea of raising the prices of fatty foods to address the problem of obesity. The increased prices will effectively discourage consumers from making purchases and lead food companies to reduce their advertising efforts for such foods; however, this solution does not address another cause of obesity which is the lack of physical activity in daily life. Therefore, a comprehensive measure would be increasing high-fat foods’ prices while concurrently encouraging people to engage in regular physical exercises.
Sample 10:
There is a growing issue in our society of people becoming dangerously overweight. Some people propose that increasing the cost of high-calorie foods can offer a solution to this problem. However, I strongly disagree with this opinion.
Firstly, increasing the price of fattening foods may not necessarily lead to a decrease in consumption. People may continue to purchase these foods, even at a higher price, as they are often more affordable and convenient than healthier alternatives. Furthermore, many people who struggle with weight issues often have underlying psychological or emotional factors that drive them to overeat. For example, an individual with a mental health disorder may turn to food as a coping mechanism, leading to an eating disorder. In cases such as this, simply increasing the price of fattening foods will not address the root cause of their overeating behavior, and they may continue to consume unhealthy food options.
Moreover, increasing the price of fattening foods may disproportionately affect low-income individuals who may already struggle to afford healthier food options. For instance, a low-income family may rely on fast food and other unhealthy, high-calorie options due to the lower cost compared to healthier foods. If the prices of these foods increase, they may no longer be able to afford them. This could lead to a situation where those who are already economically disadvantaged are further marginalized and may even be forced to rely on even cheaper, unhealthier food options.
In conclusion, while it may be tempting to think that increasing the price of fattening foods is a simple solution to the problem of people becoming overweight, it fails to address the root causes of the issue and may disproportionately affect low-income individuals.
Sample 11:
Obesity rates have been steadily rising, raising concerns about the overall well-being of individuals. To address this issue, some argue that increasing the price of high-calorie foods would provide a solution. I believe that this approach is insufficient at best.
On one hand, raising the price of fattening foods can certainly produce a positive impact on curbing the obesity epidemic. It is quite obvious that excessive consumption is mostly traced back to the availability and affordability of unhealthy food options. By increasing the price of these items, individuals will be deterred from frequent purchases, as higher price generally leads to reduced demand. Consequently, this measure may encourage people to make healthier food choices, which usually include fruits, vegetables, whole grains and lean meats, leading to a reduction in obesity rates.
On the other hand, there are limitations to the effectiveness of price manipulation, mostly concerning the equality in its application. The socio-economic factor plays a crucial role here, as individuals from lower-income backgrounds may still find it challenging to afford healthier alternatives. Additionally, price increase alone fails to address the root causes of obesity, such as the lack of education on nutrition and limited access to exercise facilities. Therefore, solely relying on price hikes may not yield comprehensive and long-lasting results.
From my perspective, while raising the price of fattening foods can be a step in the right direction, it is crucial to supplement it with other comprehensive measures. Public awareness campaigns on healthy eating habits and the importance of regular exercise should be implemented on a national scale. Moreover, the government must spare no effort to improve the accessibility and affordability of nutritious food options, particularly in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. Combining these initiatives with price increases can create a more holistic approach to combating obesity.
In conclusion, although raising the price of high-calorie foods may discourage their consumption and have some positive effects on reducing obesity rates, it should not be considered a standalone solution. A multi-faceted approach that includes education, accessibility and affordability of healthier food choices is necessary for long-term success.
Sample 12:
The escalating issue of obesity has sparked debate over solutions, including raising prices on unhealthy foods. I believe this strategy, while not a panacea, forms part of a multifaceted approach to tackling obesity, alongside education and accessibility to healthier alternatives.
Increasing the cost of high-calorie, low-nutrient foods can indeed serve as a deterrent, making them less accessible to the general populace. Economic disincentives have historically influenced consumer behaviour, as seen in the tobacco industry, where higher prices significantly curbed smoking rates. A parallel can be drawn with fattening foods; by making them less economically attractive, we might encourage healthier eating habits. However, this approach alone is simplistic. It fails to address deeper societal and psychological factors that contribute to obesity, such as stress, lack of education about nutrition, and the availability of healthy options. Without addressing these root causes, the problem may persist or manifest in other unhealthy behaviours.
Moreover, focusing solely on price increases overlooks the necessity of fostering a culture that values nutrition and physical well-being. Education plays a crucial role in this. By implementing comprehensive nutritional education programs and ensuring access to affordable, healthy food options, we can empower individuals to make informed decisions about their diets. This, combined with price adjustments, could create a more effective strategy for combating obesity. Communities need environments that support healthy choices, including safe, accessible spaces for physical activity and supermarkets stocked with fresh produce.
In conclusion, while increasing the price of fattening foods might contribute to the fight against obesity, it should not stand alone. A holistic approach that includes education, accessibility to healthier options, and societal support for a culture of well-being is essential. By adopting such a comprehensive strategy, we can address the multifaceted nature of obesity and move towards a healthier society.
Sample 13:
The alarming rise in obesity rates, where people are becoming seriously overweight, has fueled debates on effective solutions. A popular proposal calls for raising the prices of high-calorie foods to reduce consumption. While this fiscal strategy has some merit, I argue that it is overly simplistic, neglects the impact on economically disadvantaged groups, and fails to address the multifaceted nature of the obesity epidemic.
In the lexicon of economic theory, the principles of supply and demand are more than theoretical constructs; they wield an undeniable influence over consumer behavior. This has been conspicuously validated by Mexico’s sugar tax policy, which triggered a marked decline in soda sales. Yet, the seemingly resplendent success of such a fiscal strategy masks the bleaker and more complex realities of socioeconomic inequality. Raising the cost of calorie-rich foods could inadvertently instate a 'nutritional divide,' making balanced diets a rarified luxury that only the affluent can regularly afford, thus entrenching a cycle of poverty and deteriorating health.
On the other side of the coin, the mounting complexities tied to the surge in obesity rates - where people are becoming seriously overweight - cannot be solved by economics alone. Scandinavian countries, in spite of their elevated food prices, demonstrate remarkably lower obesity prevalence. The secret lies in a multi-pronged public health strategy that extends far beyond economic disincentives. It encompasses educational campaigns, meticulously designed urban spaces conducive to physical activity, and stringent food-labeling laws that are transparent and informative. These varied elements synergistically forge a nuanced, comprehensive strategy, transcending economic solutions to offer a socially equitable and sustainable approach to a pervasive public health crisis.
In summary, the notion of augmenting food prices, while superficially appealing, is myopic and fraught with economic inequities. The genuine panacea resides in an integrative, multidisciplinary blueprint that combines fiscal levers with educational and environmental reform, thereby ensuring a sustainable and inclusive resolution to this burgeoning health epidemic.
Sample 14:
The escalating prevalence of obesity has become a pressing public health concern, affecting millions globally. A segment of society contends that surging the prices of high-calorie, unhealthy foods could serve as an effective deterrent. However, although economic intervention like increasing the price of high-calorie foods has merit, I assert that it's a superficial remedy that disproportionately affects lower-income families and overlooks broader, systemic factors such as educational programs and comprehensive public health policies.
The theory of supply and demand suggests that inflating the prices of calorie-laden foods would likely lead to a decline in their consumption—a point vividly illustrated by Mexico's sugar tax, which significantly curbed soda sales. However, such a strategy has its drawbacks; it disproportionately burdens those in lower socioeconomic tiers who often depend on cheap, unhealthy foods. This could perpetuate a form of dietary elitism, where nutritious meals become a luxury only the wealthy can afford, thus sustaining a cycle of poverty and deteriorating health.
On the flip side, obesity is a complex issue with a myriad of contributing factors that extend beyond simple economics. For instance, Scandinavian countries maintain lower obesity rates despite high food prices, a success attributed to comprehensive public health initiatives that encompass educational outreach, city planning that encourages physical activities, and strict food labelling laws. Therefore, a more integrated, multifaceted approach is essential. Initiatives like Singapore's "Healthier Dining Program," which incentivizes eateries to offer balanced food choices, showcase how socially inclusive, varied strategies can lead to sustainable improvements in both individual and societal health.
In conclusion, while the economic tactic of raising prices for unhealthy foods shows promise in curbing consumption, a holistic and inclusive strategy, incorporating educational programs, urban planning, and incentivized healthy eating options, offers a more sustainable and equitable solution for combating this multifaceted public health crisis.
Sample 15:
The problem of overweight is one of the most troublesome signs of deteriorating public health. Many people are suffering from obesity, and some hold the opinion that the effective remedy is to raise the cost of unhealthy food. While I agree that this action may bring certain merits, one could argue that there are far more suitable solutions.
On the one hand, it is advisable to reduce the obesity rate by increasing fattening food’s price due to the correlation between fast food and health. Since people are living in a fast-paced society, fast food chains are becoming more ubiquitous and cheaper in order to satisfy customers’ demand. If the price of junk food goes up and nutritious options are more widely available, there is a likelihood that fewer people would opt for the unhealthy ones. Obviously, when the demand for fattening meals goes down, this can help minimize the risks of contracting obesity.
On the other hand, one would contend that a more drastic measure to combat the obesity crisis starts from the family. This is because parents should act as role models for children to imitate by cooking healthy home-cooked meals and make sure the whole family has sufficient physical activities on a daily basis. Mothers can substitute ready-made meals and fizzy drinks with food with less fat and sugary contents, fresh vegetables, or fruits. Moreover, the family can schedule a suitable timeframe to walk or play sports, which not only helps with weight control but also can tighten family bonds. As a result, it is undeniable that the effectiveness of the solution to impose a tax on fast food is pale in comparison to the proposed initiative.
In conclusion, it is true that obesity is growing at an alarming rate. Establishing a well-balanced eating habit from the family is proven to be more effective in handling this problem instead of focusing only on raising the price of unhealthy ready-made meals. Unless people take action now, the younger generation shall be outlived by their parents and even grandparents.
Sample 16:
In this century, obesity is considered a global issue because of its consequences among all aged people. Many claim that the rise in the cost of fattening foods should solve this problem. This essay agrees with the statement as the increase in price makes people less affordable to eat out and also, they begin to appreciate food cooked at home.
One main reason for the reduction in consumption of fattening foods is affordability. It is a known fact that children are the major victims of obesity, and they inherit the condition when they grow up. For instance, the rise in the price of street foods would make the kids stop or eat less as they have minimal pocket money when they study. Hence, they become less addicted to the taste and overcome the habit in the long run. In adults, the surge in the rates would make them think twice to shell out extra money from their hard-earned savings.
Secondly, it is evident that home-cooked foods will be valued. Due to the growth in rates of fast foods, people begin to eat a lot at home in order to save money. Consequently, they understand the real benefits of home foods apart from saving them. The pandemic period, for example, threw new opportunities for families to try new dishes and taste them. This paved the way to test their taste buds with a variety of foods that are still healthy. Subsequently, they realized that home-based foods could be delicious, which indirectly creates a healthy eating habit.
To conclude, the surge in the rates of fast foods is a blessing for a healthier world. This is due to the lack of affordability and the high value and respect they give to home-cooked foods.
Sample 17:
Obesity has emerged as a significant health concern in numerous countries, and its multifaceted nature calls for various approaches to combat it. Some argue that increasing the price of fattening foods could be a solution to address this issue. In this essay, I will share my perspective on whether such a measure can effectively tackle obesity.
On one hand, there are several compelling reasons to support the idea of raising the price of fattening foods as a means to combat obesity. Firstly, it may dissuade individuals from consuming unhealthy and calorie-dense foods. With increased prices, people might be inclined to opt for healthier, low-calorie alternatives. Secondly, such a measure can generate revenue that can be channeled toward promoting healthier eating habits and physical activities. Thirdly, it could potentially alleviate the burden on the healthcare system by preventing obesity-related health problems.
On the other hand, there are also reasons to believe that solely increasing the price of fattening foods may not be the ultimate solution to the obesity problem. Firstly, individuals with low incomes may still find it challenging to afford healthier food options, leading them to continue consuming fattening foods. Secondly, some people may turn to cheaper, albeit less healthy, alternatives such as fast food, which can be equally fattening. Thirdly, even with higher prices, some individuals may be resistant to changing their eating habits.
In my opinion, while increasing the price of fattening foods can serve as a valuable strategy to address obesity, it should not be viewed as a standalone solution. Instead, it should be accompanied by a comprehensive approach that encompasses education and awareness campaigns, subsidies for healthy foods, and the promotion of physical activities.
In conclusion, although some argue that increasing the price of fattening foods can resolve the issue of obesity, I believe that it is a partial solution. Combating obesity requires a multifaceted approach that encompasses various measures to achieve long-term and impactful results.
Sample 18:
The prevalence of obesity has been steadily increasing, prompting concerns about overall health. Some propose that raising the price of high-calorie foods could offer a solution. In my opinion, this approach falls short.
On one hand, increasing the cost of fatty foods could potentially mitigate the obesity crisis. It is evident that excessive consumption often stems from the availability and affordability of unhealthy food choices. By raising prices, people may reduce their purchases due to decreased affordability, potentially opting for healthier options such as fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and lean meats. This shift could lead to a decline in obesity rates.
On the other hand, there are limitations to the effectiveness of price adjustments, particularly concerning fairness. Socioeconomic factors play a critical role, as those from lower-income backgrounds may still struggle to afford healthier alternatives. Moreover, solely increasing prices fails to address underlying issues like nutritional education and limited access to exercise facilities. Therefore, relying solely on price hikes may not yield comprehensive and sustainable outcomes.
From my perspective, while increasing the cost of high-calorie foods can be a positive step, it is essential to complement this strategy with broader measures. National campaigns to raise public awareness about healthy eating habits and regular exercise are crucial. Furthermore, governments must prioritize improving the accessibility and affordability of nutritious food options, especially in disadvantaged areas. Combining these efforts with price adjustments can create a more holistic approach to combating obesity.
Ultimately, while increasing the price of high-calorie foods may deter their consumption and contribute positively to reducing obesity rates, it should not be seen as a standalone solution. A comprehensive approach that includes education, accessibility, and affordability of healthier food options is essential for sustained success.
Sample 19:
Inveigled by their aroma and the gut’s responsive bleat, people today have been completely ensnared by their favourite fast-food treat. However, this transient decoy comes with its ramifications. The primary causative effect that it causes is a fallacious and unhealthy body mass index of people owing to their obesity. To this, some people peddle forth to increase the selling prices of such fast-food products causing health hazards. However, I would differ from the viewpoint presented. In the subsequent paragraphs, I shall propound my views on the issue.
To begin with, as is rife, modernization has caused and paved the way for the cornered sections of the society to be educated, empowered, and employable, and with it, more and more working professionals have come along. With more people entangled in their daily workloads, lesser emphasis has thus naturally been on cooking the meals at home, and more so, the hoopla of managing both has certainly been overwhelming and making one feel work like a trojan. In such a “click and flick” era where a significant number of people may approach their fast-food outlets easily, simply putting a higher price quotation couldn’t ever curb people from consuming and feasting on junk food. More so, as is found in a survey, people falling in the bracket of the upper class with an above-average income are found to be the steadfast consumers of such packaged and unhealthy meals. Hence, as is pretty comprehensible, raising the prices of these eatables wouldn’t make much of a dent in the pockets of people who may afford it easily.
The wages of people in concomitance to what they could frugally spend would be negligible, even after upheaving the taxes on such edible items. The striking need of the hour is to make people more aware of the cataclysmic causes of having such food that might render them extremely unhealthy and frail. Acknowledging people with the detrimental corollary and pernicious eventualities of having an imbalanced diet and a decrepit BMI may keep them alarmed and watchful of what they are being served or choose to be served with to eat. The health confederations should focus on pragmatic and logical foregrounds where they check the roots of such causes. That would perspicuously mean indoctrinating people and spending providently on such health counselling sessions.
Although putting junk platters on a high tax bracket might, to an extent, mitigate the consumption, it couldn’t entirely debase the proliferation of such unhealthy lifestyles that could only get etched in the minds of people upon their being guided and informed.
Hence, to conclude, we may say that increasing the prices and making junk food expensive couldn’t go in alignment with the idea of keeping people fit and healthy. Rather it is extremely important to enlighten and propagandize the benefits of a sound lifestyle and the malignant denouement of fattening and chemically preserved food.
Sample 20:
Given that obesity has become an impending trend today, it is assumed that a hike in the prices of fattening foods will curb the problem. However, I would say it is oversimplified to pin the hope on inflating the prices of junk food since the approach does not do much to encourage a healthy diet.
Indeed, it is not difficult to understand why increasing the prices of fattening food is considered effective to constrain the trend towards overweight. Those who think in this way opt to attribute the conundrum to people’s unhealthy diet: the impressionable majority are inevitably susceptible to the low prices when shopping for groceries, while such foods tend to contain excessive sugar or fat. Based on this understanding, some people believe that inflating costs of fattening foods can compel consumers to buy more healthy products.
Plausible though the above reasoning seems, I would say that to make junk foods less affordable does not have much of a role to play in improving public health. The overriding concern here is: those championing the claim in question reach their conclusion based on an erroneous causal connection between the problem and its reason – what exactly results in people’s bias for junk foods is their economic plight: those living in poverty are intimidated by the prohibitive prices of quality foods (i.e., fresh vegetables, fruits, etc.) and turn to less expensive counterparts. With this in mind, to increase fattening foods affordability will not change reality on the ground, whereas other options may be more practical, with one measure being governmental subsidy for healthy diet among less well-off class.
From what has been discussed, I would say that inflating fattening foods will improve people’s healthy diet, while a more practical solution is to make quality food more affordable.
Hot: 500+ Đề thi thử tốt nghiệp THPT các môn, ĐGNL các trường ĐH... file word có đáp án (2025). Tải ngay
CÂU HỎI HOT CÙNG CHỦ ĐỀ
Lời giải
Sample 1:
Although fossil fuels still remain the most important energy sources in many places, some countries are now already using alternative sources like solar or wind power. In my opinion, it can be difficult for a country to move towards using alternative energy at first, but this development brings about several benefits in the long run.
On the one hand, the change towards using alternative types of energy would probably put a heavy financial burden on the government and companies as they will have to invest millions of dollars in purchasing and developing new equipment and facilities for harnessing solar, wind or hydro-electric power. For example, the average cost of installing a wind turbine for generating electricity is about $3 million, and an average country would require a wind farm with hundreds of turbines to supply power to all companies and households. In addition, the production cost of large solar panels is still very high, which is why many countries, especially those with a poor economy, are still unable to use this power source.
However, I still believe that shifting towards using alternative energy is a worthwhile investment due to the great benefits it brings. Firstly, fossil fuels are the main cause of air pollution nowadays since petroleum-powered vehicles and factories are releasing tremendous amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere every day. Therefore, replacing coal and petroleum with wind or solar power will help to reduce the level of emissions in the atmosphere and improve air quality. Secondly, fossil fuels, like natural gas or oil, are finite resources and will soon be depleted, which will potentially threaten the economy if there are no alternative sources. This fact emphasizes the need to develop renewable energy to gradually replace traditional sources when fossil fuels inevitably run out.
In conclusion, I hold the view that despite the high initial cost of new equipment and facilities, the switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources is still necessary for the long-term development of the planet.
Sample 2:
The debate around our primary sources of energy has been intensifying in recent decades, with some pushing for more sustainable energy while others arguing that fossil fuels should remain the main source of power globally. I personally think renewable energy production should be encouraged, since it’s important that nations should seek to reduce their own carbon emissions to divert the dangers of climate change as well as build a more sustainable economy.
Firstly, fossil fuel should be discouraged because it could bring about the existential threat of climate change. As a result, biodiversity is at an all-time low, with shifting climates and rising sea levels slowly eroding the delicate tapestry of food webs across the globe. As scientists are convinced this is directly the cause of human activity, such as in agriculture and fossil fuel consumption, renewable energies would help slow this threat immediately and might be our only solution to salvaging the planet.
Secondly, one could argue that renewable energies are more sustainable and would therefore be better for the economy in the long run. While oil and coal are a finite resource and take millions of years to replenish, energy from wind and solar can in theory never run out. Therefore, making a switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy can be a solution that thinks of the longer term, since it could avert an economic crash when oil fully depletes. Many analysts have warned that with the current trajectory, oil could run out by 2050; when this happens, it could sharply affect the biggest economies in the world that are still heavily dependent on oil.
Overall, I argue that the climate effects as a result of fossil fuels consumption combined with the economic benefits of renewable energies mean that we should encourage the development of these forms of energy.
Sample 3:
Fossil fuels, such as coal, oil, and natural gas, have long been the dominant sources of energy in many countries. However, their extensive use has resulted in significant environmental harm, prompting the need for alternative sources of energy. In response to this, many countries are encouraging the adoption of renewable energy sources like wind and solar power. This essay will discuss the reasons behind the promotion of alternative energy sources and argue that it is a positive development.
One of the key reasons for the promotion of alternative energy sources is their potential to mitigate the negative environmental impacts associated with fossil fuels. Unlike fossil fuels, renewable energy sources produce little to no greenhouse gas emissions during operation, thereby reducing the contribution to climate change. For instance, countries like Germany have implemented strong incentives and subsidies to support the development of solar power, leading to a significant increase in the share of renewable energy in their energy mix. This shift towards cleaner sources of energy is driven by the recognition of the urgent need to combat climate change and reduce dependence on finite fossil fuel reserves.
The encouragement of alternative energy sources has numerous positive implications and is a positive trend. It promotes energy diversification, reducing reliance on a single energy source and increasing energy security. By harnessing the power of wind, solar, and other renewable sources, countries can decrease their vulnerability to fluctuations in fossil fuel prices and geopolitical tensions related to energy resources. Additionally, the transition to renewable energy stimulates innovation and job creation. As governments invest in renewable energy infrastructure and technologies, new industries and employment opportunities emerge.
In conclusion, the encouragement of alternative energy sources, such as wind and solar power, is driven by the need to address environmental concerns and promote sustainable development. By reducing greenhouse gas emissions, diversifying energy sources, and fostering economic growth, the adoption of renewable energy brings numerous benefits. Therefore, it is crucial for countries to continue investing in research, technology, and policy frameworks that support the widespread adoption of renewable energy, ensuring a cleaner and more sustainable energy future.
Sample 4:
Fossil fuel, though extensively used, is not eco-friendly, and its usage comes with huge environmental costs. Considering global warming and climate change, and the detrimental effects fossil fuels have on the environment, green fuel, such as solar, hydro and wind power, is increasingly being used in many countries. It is a good thing that many countries have already started using these green power sources.
The promotion of alternative sources of energy has gained significant momentum in numerous countries because of a growing concern about the adverse effects of fossil fuels on the environment such as greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. Governments and environmental organizations recognize the urgent need to transition to cleaner and more sustainable energy options. For instance, countries like Germany have implemented ambitious renewable energy targets, investing heavily in wind and solar power to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels and combat climate change.
The stock of fossil fuels is limited and would get exhausted at a certain point. So, alternative and green sources, which are renewable, would be the main source of our energy in the future. Despite the shift from fossil fuel to green energy being expensive and labour-intensive, green energy like wind and solar energy is renewable, their use should be as much encouraged as possible from right now, and it is a good thing that the trend has already started. Alternative sources of power, such as solar and wind power, do not pollute the environment, have lower carbon emissions and are eco-friendly. So, their use could save the planet from the disaster of global warming which is already visible around us. Wind power and solar power are in use in countries like Denmark, Germany and France, and more and more countries are joining the list. We already have extremely efficient technology to produce solar and wind power, and the trend is quite encouraging.
To conclude, the energy demand is increasing at a fast pace, and the stock of fossil fuels is diminishing. So, we should turn to alternative green energy sources and share the technology and expertise with all nations so that the transition happens all around the world to save our otherwise dying planet due to climate change and greenhouse effects.
Sample 5:
Every year the energy demand is increasing globally. So, the strains on the current and already limited resources are high. Since these energy resources, like fossil fuels, are mostly imported by countries, some countries have opted for alternative sources of energy to enjoy greater energy security. I wholeheartedly believe that it is a positive trend.
Alternative sources of energy offer greater energy security and independence and that is why their production and use is increasing. Relying on traditional energy sources, often imported from other countries, can leave nations vulnerable to price fluctuations and geopolitical tensions. Embracing renewable energy sources, such as hydroelectric, geothermal, or biomass, allows countries to tap into their own natural resources and reduce dependence on foreign energy imports. This is why it has already gained popularity.
Fossil fuels, like coal and oil, are not unlimited. A few countries like Germany and Japan, for example, are completely dependent on the import of such resources. For all these countries, alternative energy, also known as green energy, is the answer for the future, and it is a welcoming trend that many countries have already started producing green energy. By embracing renewable energy options, countries can address climate change, enhance energy independence, create employment opportunities, and drive technological progress. Countries like France and Norway, among others, have invested in the technology needed to produce extremely efficient solar panels to store energy from the sun or produce wind power. The positive impacts of this development are innumerable, and many countries are following in their footsteps.
In conclusion, the use of green energy sources is gaining traction because many countries want to become energy self-sufficient. This is definitely a positive trend as it reduces reliance on energy imports, helps countries fight climate change, advances technology and creates more employment.
Sample 6:
These days, the environment is being severely affected by the excessive use of nonrenewable energy resources, such as petrol, diesel, coal and natural gas. However, eco-friendly and renewable power sources like wind and solar power are being adopted in many countries mainly because they do not harm the environment, and I wholeheartedly think that it is a positive trend.
The shift towards renewable energy sources in many countries is primarily to fight global warming and climate change. Fossil fuels are often the reason climate change is so severe and threatens the existence of humans on the mother planet. Many countries, including Germany, Norway and France, have adopted the use of green energy like solar and wind power to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels to save the environment.
It is a positive trend as it greatly reduces the carbon content of the environment and makes the planet more sustainable. Without extensive use of green energy, we will soon transform our planet into an uninhabitable one. To save our planet from destruction, we need to produce and use more green and renewable energy. Moreover, it is cheaper to produce such clean energy than to extract coal or natural gas which makes these eco-friendly energies affordable to mass people. A recent study by Oxford University reveals that the production of solar power is 30% cheaper than that of fossil fuel. This finding again emphasizes how important it is for all nations to opt for renewable energy sources, and how beneficial it is that many countries have already invested in generating clean power.
In conclusion, even though we have harmed our mother planet to a great extent by indiscriminately using fossil fuels, some countries have already shown us a better way to produce and use power. It is expected that more countries will invest in alternative sources of energy to make the planet green again and make energy affordable for all.
Sample 7:
While fossil fuels have been the backbone of our energy supply for centuries, they have severe harmful impacts on our environment. Therefore, some countries have started relying on green energy to reverse the situation. And it is a positive trend that we have started researching and using alternative sources of energy, also known as green energy, that are sustainable and do not cause long-term damage to our environment.
One of the main reasons alternative energy sources are being used to produce green energy in many countries is their ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which are a major contributor to climate change. According to the International Energy Agency, the use of renewable energy sources can help reduce global CO2 emissions by up to 70% by 2050. This is a significant step towards protecting our planet from the devastating effects of climate change, including rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and loss of biodiversity.
The use of renewable sources to generate energy is a positive development for a variety of reasons. For instance, investing in renewable energy can also create jobs and boost the economy. According to the Renewable Energy and Jobs Annual Review 2020, the renewable energy sector employed around 11.5 million people worldwide in 2019, a 6% increase from the previous year. This growth in employment opportunities can help to stimulate local economies and provide new job opportunities for people in both developed and developing countries. For example, in Germany, the government's decision to phase out nuclear power plants and invest in renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power, has created over 300,000 jobs and contributed to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
In conclusion, the shift towards green energy sources is a positive development that can help to protect our environment and create new job opportunities. While it may take time and investment to transition away from fossil fuels, it is a necessary step to ensure a sustainable future for generations to come.
Sample 8:
Many nations are now supporting the adoption of various energy alternatives in order to reduce fossil fuel consumption. In my opinion, though there may be short-term economic downsides, this is a decidedly positive development due to the implications on the environment generally.
Those who feel the sudden adoption of alternative energies is a negative point out the financial repercussions. There are economies around the world that are currently dependent on exporting fossil fuels, in particular in The Middle East, South America, and Eastern Europe. Many of these countries are still developing and have few other natural resources or industries that could replace a decline in the energy sector. The economic effects will extend far beyond exporters though. Both developed and developing nations ranging from the United States and Vietnam to China and Russia exploit oil for private vehicles and various industries. Substituting cheap oil for a more expensive alternative might result in economic catastrophe with wide-ranging repercussions.
However, the environmental effect is overwhelmingly more important for the long-term health of the planet. The economic results of less dependence on fossil fuels will cause short-term problems but the issues caused by climate change are also becoming a present reality. For instance, there has been a rise in the number of cataclysmic natural disasters related to rising ocean temperatures and deforestation. Even more troubling are the less noticed problems such as habitats being destroyed in remote areas like Antarctica and the Amazon Rainforest. Beyond the animals becoming endangered and extinct, it is only a number of years before human life is affected. This existential threat is the reason alternative energies are a pressing need.
In conclusion, despite the economic drawbacks of a sudden shift to alternative power sources, this reorientation will have a markedly positive long-term impact on the environment. Governments should therefore implement and bolster alternative energy initiatives.
Sample 9:
The development of renewable energies like wind power, wave power, or solar energy to replace the electricity generated from burning fossil fuels has become an increasingly popular trend in the world. I believe this is a green movement in the energy sector with countless benefits that people should welcome.
The most palpable advantage one can recognize at once when mentioning renewable energies is that they reduce the burden on the environment. The use of solar power creates no emission at all, and thus provides for the need of power at almost no environmental cost. It is similarly clean and sustainable when wind, wave, and water moving around the Earth eternally can be used in energy production. Also, the independence from fossil fuels in electricity generation saves the world from a rapid depletion of coal, oil and natural gases, and slow down the imminent energy crisis which may even cause wars over energy sources among countries.
Moreover, the production of green energy also benefits individuals and the country as a whole. Thanks to less burning of fossil fuels in thermal energy plants, workers in energy companies face less risks of occupational health problems especially those related to respiratory diseases and may lead to early death. On the large scale of a country, the utilization of wind, wave, sunlight, and even geothermal heat to produce electricity will diversify the energy portfolio of different nations, making them free from reliance on limited natural resources to generate electricity due to their unfavourable geographical locations.
In conclusion, the movement of the world towards more use of renewable energy is completely positive when it solves multiple problems of environmental pollution, dependence on natural resources for energy, and poor health of workers in thermal power plants.
Sample 10:
Governments across continents have turned their attention to more sustainable sources of energy as alternatives to fossil fuels. In my opinion, this could be seen as a progress for the following reasons.
First, there is no arguing that producing energy from buried dead organisms lacks sustainability, which means such production could not guarantee the survival of humans in the long term. In fact, the consumption of energy generated from fossil fuels tends to accelerate in direct correlation with the growth of the world population. With the current rate of exploitation, this valuable resource would dwindle away in no time, leaving no other choice than seeking additional reserves such as nuclear power or hydroelectricity. This is a safe solution to the fear of energy scarcity and ensures the future development of the human race.
Second, dependence on fossil fuel for worldwide energy supply would cause environmental degradation while using solar power, for example, is considered an ultimate choice of energy conservation. The combustion of fossil fuels is the culprit of greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollutants, leading to tremendous damage to the environment. Such suffering of the Earth could not be justified by the growing need of humans. By contrast, this would never be the case when it comes to other alternatives as mentioned above. If governments continue to invest in exploiting those new sources, there will be an unlimited amount of inexpensive energy in the long run.
In conclusion, I believe that the use of other potential energy sources to replace fossil fuels is obviously an important step forward.
Sample 11:
Fossil fuels, such as coal, oil, and natural gas, are extensively used in many countries and cause harm to the environment. The use of alternative sources of energy, including wind and solar power, however, is being encouraged in many countries. Is this a positive or negative development?
In several nations, non-renewable sources of energy, namely coal, petroleum, and gasoline, are used inordinately, which is severely damaging the ecosystem. However, other countries are promoting the usage of non-conventional sources of power, such as wind and solar energy. I personally consider that this has been a positive development because the non-traditional approach will aid in efficient energy output and protect the ecosystem from feasible hazards.
Primarily, the remarkable advantage of the aforementioned alternative sources is that they are renewable. These energy sources have a constant supply of power and there is no requirement for significant raw materials. Although it could be argued that the initial cost of setting up solar panels and wind farms is extremely high, I would assert that once the installation cost has been met with, their maintenance is practically negligible. Apart from this, it is widely accepted that fossil fuels take millions of years to form, and once consumed, they cannot be re-used. To illustrate, if modern individuals burn immense petroleum and coal, these resources are likely to vanish, and future generations would not be capable of using these precious energy sources.
Another major benefit of eco-friendly energy sources is their non-polluting nature. The intensive usage of natural resources forms carbon emissions and emits noxious gases that are nurturing global warming and depleting the ozone layer. Even worse, by inhaling such poisonous gases and carbon fumes, human beings are susceptible to various health ailments such as asthma and lung cancer. However, when energy is harnessed from wind turbines and solar panels there are no such deleterious by-products. Unlike other automobiles, for instance, commuting through a solar car would not emit carbon dioxide.
In conclusion, not only do alternative sources provide an inordinate amount of energy supply constantly, but they also preserve the environment in a very effective way. Therefore, I completely believe that this trend is a wholly positive development and one that authorities ought to promote.
Sample 12:
In this day and age, the consumption of non-renewable resources is burgeoning day by day. Owing to this it reached an alarming rate. It takes millions of years to form. However, some nations are taking a step forward and using non-conventional sources of power. This essay will highlight that this is certainly an optimistic approach that needs to be opted.
At the outset, non-conventional sources can be recycled and utilized again. Although, the use of alternative sources has some hurdles like the initial cost of setting up solar panels and wind farms is very high and these also rely on geographical locations. When masses use this energy source for a long period of time, the energy can be renewed and produced, no extra cost will have more economic benefit than the others. Besides this, the use of renewable energy could help to conserve foreign exchange and generate local employment if conservation technologies are designed, manufactured, assembled, and installed locally.
Moving further, alternative sources- wind power, tidal power, solar power – sources are totally safe for the environment, have lower carbon emission, and are eco-friendly. The research concluded that there are some countries that have utilized alternative sources namely German, France, and Denmark as these nations save the planet from a disaster of global warming. Some countries use automobile cars that work on solar power. Consequently, it has reduced the carbon footprint of such countries and made its greenery.
Based on this study it can be reiterated that the use of alternative sources of energy is an optimistic evolvement, which can save the whole globe from the catastrophic impact of greenhouse emissions as well as global warming. Furthermore, more and more folks should adopt renewable sources to ameliorate the conditions of the environment. In this way, by taking joint efforts individuals can preserve the world.
Sample 13:
Due to the shortage of fossil fuels, whether other natural power resources should be encouraged to harness or not, becomes a paramount concern for many countries. I believe, while this advancement may decrease awareness among people about protecting the fuels, it also solves the problem of the lack of energy sources.
First of all, fossil fuels which are the major energy resources in many nations are facing the threats of becoming obsolete due to the overuse by the human race in daily life. As a result, people should be encouraged to raise awareness of fuel conservation. However, the utilization of alternative natural energy sources could prevent people from doing this by reducing the fears of coal or oil that might be running out. Because there are other sources to use, they would use more energy generated from gas or oil without hesitation. In my personal opinion, the negative sides of using different resources of power could deteriorate the shortage of fuels.
Harnessing alternative power sources (such as solar or wind power), in contrast, could reduce the usage of fossil fuels in generating energy for a range of demanding activities such as heating and driving. While coal and oil mines are limited, natural resources such as wind and solar power are considered unlimited. This wind power or solar energy is consequently able to produce enough energy for human demand without the help of fossil fuels. As a result, it should be encouraged to be utilized in more countries in the world to gradually cut down the usage of fossil fuels.
To sum up, the encouragement of using natural resources (such as solar or wind) for producing energy has both negative and positive sides. However, I deem that humankind should consider using more power from solar or wind and less from coal and gas to protect the remaining parts of fossil fuels.
Sample 14:
Coals, oil, and gas are some fossil fuels that are the most common sources of energy for the majority of countries. On the other hand, some countries encourage the use of renewable resources like wind and solar energy. I believe this is a strongly positive development as we will be in grave danger if the world runs out of these natural non-renewable resources like fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels are used in almost all industries and for running motor vehicles. We can minimize this by using alternatives wherever possible. If it goes on like this, we will soon have such a shortage of these fuels that can pose a threat to running things efficiently. For example, some industries can only run on coal or oil, though this is not the case for cars. Automobiles can easily run on electricity, and so we should limit the use of such fuels. Burning too much of these fossil fuels also contributes to air pollution. Thus, it is important to minimize usage wherever possible.
On the other hand, wind energy and solar energy take comparatively longer time to generate, and they are largely dependent on the sun and the wind. We do not have any control over them, so the production of goods might slow down if there is less generation of energy as we cannot, in fact, control the weather. Perhaps tropical countries, where there is an abundant amount of sunshine and wind, can be encouraged to use these natural sources and not waste fossil fuels. However, for temperate climates, this might not be an option. Dependency on nature can have slower production rates and lead to not meeting the deadline or having scarcity in the market.
On the whole, I believe all the countries should be aware of the hazards of wasting too much of our natural reserves of energy and use them consciously and responsibly. Initiatives such as building consciousness about the issue should be taken to build a more environmentally friendly atmosphere.
Sample 15:
Fossil fuels harm the environment and to save our planet we need to encourage the use of green energy. The use of alternative sources of energy, or ‘green’ energy, is a positive trend of development, and indeed their use should be encouraged further.
As the demand for energy worldwide is increasing the strains on the existing and already limited resources also increase. To solve this problem, we must consider two issues: how to better use the existing, limited fossil fuel resources and how we can encourage the use of alternative energy sources.
It is universally acknowledged that there is a limitation on the use of fossil fuels, especially coal and oil. Some countries are rich in oil deposits like OPEC, whereas China is rich in coal deposits and Russia in natural gas. Others, such as Japan and Germany, are completely dependent on the import of resources. For all countries- resource-rich versus resource-poor, alternative energy should be encouraged and utilised to reduce the dependence on fossil fuels as well as to keep the global environment in balance and ‘healthy’.
The only way is to turn to other sources to get energy supply. Wind power and solar power are at present feasible alternatives. France is one country that has the advanced technology needed to produce extremely efficient solar panels to store energy from the sun. Both kinds of power can reduce a country’s dependence on fossil fuels. Furthermore, they do not pollute the environment and in turn, help keep the ecosystem stable.
To conclude, while fossil fuel resources are diminishing, the energy demand continues to increase year after year. It is a positive trend to develop other alternative sources of power and experiences should be shared and promoted. If this switch to alternative energy is encouraged early enough, then we may yet avoid the pending energy crisis and environmental disaster.
Lời giải
Sample 1:
It is argued that watching television has an adverse impact on children, whereas other people believe that it brings various benefits to them. I personally agree with the second group.
On the one hand, there are a number of reasons why some people think that children’s development would be negatively affected by watching TV. The first reason is that sitting in front of TV screens for too long is detrimental to children’s health. Many kids these days suffer from various health problems such as obesity, eye strain or fatigue due to prolonged television watching. Another reason is that many TV programmes and movies contain violent contents or sexual images which are inappropriate for children to watch. Heavy exposure to violent movies can put a child at a higher risk of violent behaviour, which could ruin their future.
On the other hand, I personally believe that television has an essential role to play in the development of children. Watching educational TV programmes gives children the opportunity to widen their horizons and enrich their knowledge of the world they live in. Planet Earth and Discovery Channel are prime examples. Their programmes not only take the viewer into unknown natural habitats which are home to various plants and animals, but also educate them about the importance of preserving the wonders of the Earth. In addition, many TV shows and channels provide children with limitless knowledge of almost every aspect of life. A programme called ‘Talent show for kids?’, for example, not only gives children enjoyable moments but also informs them about various subjects.
In conclusion, although some people say that watching TV is harmful to children, I would argue that it is very beneficial for them.
Sample 2:
The matter of screen time for children is open to debate, with some arguing against it while others highlight the benefits it could bring. This essay will examine both stances and present my personal opinion on the issue.
There exist certain health risks associated with TV-viewing for children. In terms of physical health conditions, excessive screen time can result in a wide range of health problems, from eye strain and back pain from prolonged periods in front of the TV, to weight gain and lethargy due to lack of exercise. These risks are also present in the adult population, but much more worrying for young children, who often lack self-control and thus are more prone to addiction. Regarding their mental well-being, children could develop behavioural problems from exposure to explicit content on screen, especially when there is no parental control installed on the device. The effects of violent or sexual acts on young minds are well- documented, with disobedience, aggression, and risk-taking tendencies being the most common issues.
Nevertheless, the advantages of watching TV for children should not be dismissed. One of the most significant benefits is language acquisition. The availability of shows in native tongue or foreign languages, coupled with subtitles and audio-visual aids, allows young children to grasp new vocabulary, as well as its usage. In fact, many children in Vietnam have eagerly learned English from watching shows from channels like Disney and Cartoon Network. Aside from language, TV shows also offer knowledge on numerous areas, including science, environment, history, etc. Vivid imagery and amusing delivery of hosts on kids' educational shows can help children better understand difficult concepts like multiplication compared to traditional textbooks.
In conclusion, after considering both sides of the argument, I believe that children stand to benefit academically from TV shows; however, to minimise the potential drawbacks of screen time, parental guidance and supervision are needed.
Sample 3:
It is pointed out that some individuals believe that viewing television apparently has an adverse bearing on children, while others argue that it brings numerous benefits. This essay discusses both points of view before shedding light on why I side with the latter view.
On the one hand, watching television is conspicuously conductive to children in terms of inventiveness and also enhances language development. To begin with, conveying knowledge through television gives children exposure to a plethora of cultures and perspectives, hence fostering creativity through imaginative storytelling. It is apparent that some television programmes such as Cartoon Network often feature interactive activities and problem-solving challenges, and thus inspire children to think outside the box and explore their creativity. Furthermore, the collosal of children's TV programs incorporate repetition, which is a key element in language reception. To elaborate further, repeated interaction with words, sentences and concepts helps reinforce learning and thus linguistic development.
On the other hand, viewing television takes a toll on children in terms of their mental and also physical health. To start with, TV shows have a lot of negative content that cannot be avoided and thus when the children are exposed to this content such as pornagraphy content that directly affects people who are almost in puberty. A propelling testament of the harmful impact that exposure to erotic material can be captivating to their developing minds, potentially evoking sexual desires that could lead to annulment for their mind and also their mental health. Moreover, viewing television can have disadvantages for children due to binge-watching and prolonged exposure to screen time, which may lead to sedentary behavior and a lack of physical activity. As a result, excessive TV watching can impact attention span, interfere with sleep patterns and even nearsightedness.
In conclusion, both perspectives hold their justifications. From my point of view, I firmly believe that prioritizing their health for the long-term life should outweigh the sake of television brings. Ultimately, moderation and content selection are key.
Sample 4:
In today’s modern society, the issue of whether watching television is beneficial or detrimental to children has sparked a controversial debate. While some individuals argue that television viewing has negative effects on youngsters, I firmly believe that it can be an educational tool for children. In this essay, I will present my reasons to support this viewpoint.
Firstly, television offers a wide range of educational programs that can enhance children’s knowledge and cognitive development. Channels dedicated to educational content, such as documentaries, science programs, and historical shows, provide valuable information that can expand children’s understanding of the world. By watching these programs, children can learn about diverse cultures, scientific concepts, and historical events, fostering their intellectual growth. For instance, renowned educational programs like “Planet Earth” or “Cosmos” captivate young audiences and expose them to the wonders of nature and the universe.
Secondly, television can serve as a powerful medium to promote creativity and imagination among children. Many animated series and children’s shows encourage imaginative thinking and storytelling. By watching these programs, youngsters can be inspired to create their own stories, draw pictures, or engage in imaginative play. This imaginative process is crucial for their cognitive and emotional development, allowing them to explore their creativity and express themselves in unique ways. Moreover, educational cartoons often incorporate moral lessons, teaching children important values such as honesty, empathy, and teamwork.
However, it is important to acknowledge the potential drawbacks of excessive television viewing. Parents should exercise responsible supervision and ensure that children have a balanced viewing experience. Excessive exposure to violent or inappropriate content can have adverse effects on children’s behavior and mental well-being. Therefore, parents should guide their children’s television choices, set limits on screen time, and encourage participation in other activities such as outdoor play, reading, or social interaction.
In conclusion, despite the concerns raised by some individuals, I am of the opinion that watching television can be educational for children. The availability of educational programs and the promotion of creativity and imagination outweigh the potential negative effects. However, parental guidance and responsible viewing habits are crucial to ensure a well-rounded development for children. By striking a balance between television viewing and other activities, children can benefit from the educational and imaginative aspects of television while avoiding its potential pitfalls.
Sample 5:
There is much debate regarding the effects of TV viewing on children. In my opinion, when watched in moderation, educational TV shows can be beneficial for children because they help them develop positive values as they grow up.
On the one hand, those who believe that TV viewing harms children in every way may argue that it is a passive activity that encourages sedentary behavior and limits meaningful play. This can lead to a range of problems, such as poor health and cognitive development. However, I believe that this argument is only valid if children spend too much time in front of the screen. Parents can protect their children from the potential dangers of TV viewing by setting reasonable time limits and providing adequate supervision.
On the other hand, there are people who argue that many TV programs are educational and can instill good values in children. For example, Disney movies often portray characters with admirable traits, such as courage, kindness, and perseverance, which can inspire children to emulate these values and become better individuals. This has led me to believe that educational & television programs can be excellent tools for teaching children moral lessons as they grow and develop. Many children find traditional forms of education boring or difficult, but the visual and interactive nature of TV can make learning more engaging and enjoyable.
In conclusion, although prolonged passive television viewing can be detrimental, watching educational TV shows in moderation can have a positive impact on children's development. Such shows can effectively impart valuable lessons and teach positive values in an engaging and entertaining manner.
Sample 6:
The role of television in children's development has been a subject of ongoing debate, with some individuals vehemently opposing it, while others advocate for its potential benefits. From my perspective, television can be beneficial if appropriately utilised.
Those who argue against children watching television often raise valid points. Primarily, they cite the negative impacts on children's physical health as a concern. With prolonged screen time, children are less likely to engage in physical activity, potentially leading to health issues such as obesity. Furthermore, they worry about the influence of harmful content. Children, being impressionable, can easily internalise violent or inappropriate behaviour depicted in certain shows, leading to negative behavioural outcomes.
On the other hand, advocates for children's television viewing highlight its educational benefits. Many television programmes are designed to be both entertaining and instructive, providing children with a wealth of knowledge about the world, aiding their cognitive development. Shows that portray different cultures, wildlife, or scientific concepts can stimulate children's curiosity and broaden their understanding. Television can also teach moral values and social skills through well-crafted narratives and character interactions.
In my opinion, the key lies in moderation and guidance. While unrestricted, unmonitored television viewing can indeed have detrimental effects, a balanced approach can turn television into a valuable educational tool. Parents and caregivers should control the amount of screen time and ensure that the content children watch is age-appropriate and beneficial.
In conclusion, while the concerns about children watching television are justified, its potential as a developmental tool cannot be dismissed. The onus is on parents and caregivers to utilise it judiciously to foster a balanced growth environment for children.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Bộ câu hỏi: [TEST] Từ loại (Buổi 1) (Có đáp án)
Bài tập chức năng giao tiếp (Có đáp án)
Bộ câu hỏi: Các dạng thức của động từ (to v - v-ing) (Có đáp án)
15000 bài tập tách từ đề thi thử môn Tiếng Anh có đáp án (Phần 1)
500 bài Đọc điền ôn thi Tiếng anh lớp 12 có đáp án (Đề 1)
Bộ câu hỏi: Thì và sự phối thì (Phần 2) (Có đáp án)
Trắc nghiệm Tiếng anh 12 Tìm từ được gạch chân phát âm khác - Mức độ nhận biết có đáp án
Bộ câu hỏi: Cấp so sánh (có đáp án)
Hãy Đăng nhập hoặc Tạo tài khoản để gửi bình luận