Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

In some countries, people are no longer allowed to smoke in many public places and office buildings. Do you think this is a good rule or a bad rule? Use specific reasons and details to support your position. You should write at least 250 words. v.7

In some countries, people are no longer allowed to smoke in many public places and office buildings. Do you think this is a good rule or a bad rule? Use specific reasons and details to support your position. v. 7
It is a proven fact that smoking is highly injurious to health. Around the globe, the government adopts multiple ways to discourage people from smoking. Recently, it has been observed that in some countries, smokers are not allowed to enjoy this activity publically or inside the buildings. I consider this as an extremely positive development towards a healthy society. To begin with, the restriction on smoking in public areas will definitely help reduce passive smokers. The smokers are not only affecting themselves but a huge number of people living in the surroundings are equally harmed. These victims are called, ” Passive smokers”. These people do not really do smoking themselves; rather, inhale the smoke while their relatives or co-workers are smoking nearby them. According to the recent survey by the local community magazine, 70% of the passive smokers suffer fatal diseases because of the smoke they inhale unwillingly. To elucidate my stance further, the ban on open smoking would also discourage smokers. In order to satisfy their need, they would have to look for a particular space; designated for this activity. Psychologically, they would be inclined to reduce smoking intervals as every time they would have to get into the hassle of walking all the way outside the building. Quoting my personal observation here, in my company, smokers have a designated area, this policy has evidently brought a positive change in the smoking habit of my colleagues. For instance, if they used to go for smoking for five to seven times a day, now that number has gone down to two to three only. Eventually, this change would certainly leave a positive impact on their health. In conclusion, I reiterate that this approach would definitely pave ways for a healthy society. Bounded space smoking enforcement would be beneficial not only for individual smokers but also for passive smokers.
It is a proven fact that
smoking
is
highly
injurious to health. Around the globe, the
government
adopts multiple ways to discourage
people
from
smoking
. Recently, it has
been observed
that in
some
countries, smokers are not
allowed
to enjoy this activity
publically
or inside the buildings. I consider this as an
extremely
positive
development towards a healthy society.

To
begin
with, the restriction on
smoking
in public areas will definitely
help
reduce
passive
smokers. The smokers are not
only
affecting themselves
but
a huge number of
people
living in the surroundings are
equally
harmed. These victims
are called
,
Passive
smokers”. These
people
do not
really
do
smoking
themselves;
rather
, inhale the smoke while their relatives or co-workers are
smoking
nearby them. According to the recent survey by the local community magazine, 70% of the
passive
smokers suffer fatal diseases
because
of the smoke they inhale
unwillingly
.

To elucidate my stance
further
, the ban on open
smoking
would
also
discourage smokers. In order to satisfy their need, they would
have to
look for a particular space; designated for this activity.
Psychologically
, they would
be inclined
to
reduce
smoking
intervals as every time they would
have to
get
into the hassle of walking all the way outside the building. Quoting my personal observation here, in my
company
, smokers have a designated area, this policy has
evidently
brought a
positive
change
in the
smoking
habit of my colleagues.
For instance
, if they
used
to go for
smoking
for five to seven times a day,
now
that number has gone down to two to three
only
.
Eventually
, this
change
would
certainly
leave
a
positive
impact on their health.

In conclusion
, I reiterate that this approach would definitely pave ways for a healthy society. Bounded space
smoking
enforcement would be beneficial not
only
for individual smokers
but
also
for
passive
smokers.
10Linking words, meeting the goal of 7 or more
14Repeated words, meeting the goal of 3 or fewer
2Mistakes
Language is the blood of the soul into which thoughts run and out of which they grow.
Oliver Wendell Holmes

IELTS essay In some countries, people are no longer allowed to smoke in many public places and office buildings. Do you think this is a good rule or a bad rule? Use specific reasons and details to support your position. v. 7

Essay
  American English
4 paragraphs
308 words
6.0
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 5.5
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.5
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 6.5
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Similar posts