In the beginning you need an end quote for the title of the article.
You might want to capitalize Congress (more than once).
is of public interest = rather than "is of" "is in?"
"First being lack of personal responsibility." = this is NOT a complete sentence. YOu might list them after the preceding sentence and a colon (:)
hyphenate "so-called"
contributor of people = contributor for
because let’s face it people = , because, lete's face it, people
fast pace life = fast-paced life
how the start = how they start + that sentence is quite long
(BTW, I think I've caught most of the errors, but my eyes do not like scanning up and down, up and down!)
You might use some commas: I also believe, for the most part, the public
there has been = there HAVE been ...studies
Fact is = The fact is
others, meaning, etc.
not there body but their body
body make up AND their genes
presented IT well (referringf to facts, plural) = them
law, so that helps (comma)
pamphlets, in my opinion; I'e never (run-on sentence
The main thing though is (one extra is needs to go)
because of our genes? (this was a question)
You could use a lot more commas and sometimes, if y u read it aloud, it will be more obvious where you need them.
Good ideas but spelling and grammar could use a bit more work.
Sra
I AM ONLY ASKING FOR YOU TO HELP WITH EDITING IT AND GIVE CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM. i AM LOOKING FOR STUFF LIKE WHAT I HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION , SPELLING ERRORS , ETC
I chose the article by John H. Banshaf III, “Lawsuits against Fast-Food Restaurants Are an Effective Way to Combat Obesity. Basically the author is talking about how big the obesity problem is in our country and how congress has done nothing to help the problem. He goes into the fact that congress wants to pass a bill that will give complete immunity to all fast food chains against obesity lawsuits. The author in this particular article is of public interest law at George Washington University. He thinks that the fast food companies are very misleading with their product, constantly comparing the fast food restaurants to the tobacco companies doing the same thing, and how legal action has been proven to be very effective against tobacco companies so he thinks it would be equally effective against fast food companies. I believe that the intended audience is congress, the American Public and the fast food chains.
John Banzhaf also known as “Ralph Nader of Junk Food”, thinks that the bill congress is trying to pass is based on two main faulty assumptions. First being lack of personal responsibility. Second that basically congress feels like fast food restaurants have disclosed what is in their food and that comparing all the obesity cases in our country they feel that fast food is a very insignificant contributor. I am skeptical of the second so called “faulty assumptions” because I do believe fast food is a big contributor of people gaining weight in our country because let’s face it people are constantly on the go in our fast pace life today and a lot of people eat fast food because of the convenience and there have been studies that have been done on people eating nothing but fast food for months at a time and how the start to experience health problems from it. However I do agree with the argument that it is personal responsibility to chose healthy foods to eat. I also believe for the most part the public as a whole is well informed of the fact that fast food is not a healthy choice. Another point I would like to add is that there has been a lot of studies done on obese people and that scientists are in agreement that genetics play a huge role in obesity. Everyone's own metabolism is different for example. Fact is that some people just metabolize food better than others meaning that naturally when they eat something there body literally burns off the calories in a quicker more efficient manner because of their body make up, their genes. For the most part the author did a good job on how he presented his argument. He stated facts that supported his opinion, and presented it well; let’s not forget though he teaches law so that helps. One of his arguments was that fast food restaurants do a better job of disclosing what is in their food. I agree they probably don’t do a very good job and he supports this well by getting very specific on how they disclose the information. They have pamphlets and websites. Most people do not take the time to read some of the pamphlets in my opinion, I’ve never really seen one when I’ve gone into a fast food place.
This is a very complicated issue in my opinion. There’s a lot of information to take into consideration. The main thing is though is how can we blame fast food restaurants for our bad choices? How can we expect them to compensate us with money if we have made a choice to eat this kind of food, or if we gain weight more than the next person eating this food because of our genes! To me it is passing the buck off on someone else instead of trying to take better care of ourselves as people. I feel that sometimes people get lazy when it comes to taking care of themselves because it is hard work, and it’s not convenient for their lifestyle. If I had an obesity problem I would try and get educated to the fullest about the issue and try and do something myself instead of trying to hold someone else accountable. I do believe it is a huge issue and that’s why I picked this article and I look forward to seeing what happens with this issue in the future!
1 answer
1 answer