The government should make laws about people’s nutrition and food choice. Others argue that would be their choice. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

The issue of whether the government should control a human’s meal by-laws has been provoking a lot of debates. Some people say that every individual has a

right

to choose what they want to eat and know what is better for themself, while others think that they have to follow the regulations in order to be supplied with all nutrients necessary. Personally, I consider myself as an advocate with the former idea while the latter one is

also

useful in some circumstances. Without a shadow of a doubt, citizens have their own life and they can make a decision about what they extremely want for their body and their health so that they have the

right

to freely choose their favourite

food

. Because eating is a process for relaxing and coming into pleasure

instead

of the pressure.

For example

, the people who can make a nutrient choice for themself like chocolate or milk tea feel happier than others who have to force it on the menu.

Hence

, it is irrefutable that people have

their

Change the word

the

show examples

right

in choosing their

food

.

On the contrary

, principles still have

its

Correct pronoun usage

their

show examples

merits in maintaining people’s health. Because a lot of citizens are too easy on eating and they consume a myriad of fast

food

such

as hamburgers, pizza or

Correct your spelling

fried chicken

show examples

fried-chicken

Correct your spelling

fried chicken

show examples

so they can easily come down with some diseases

such

as obesity and diabetes.

Therefore

it is necessary to give rules to keep control of people’s nutrition and foodstuff choice and guard their health. In conclusion, eating is a hobby and everybody should have the

right

to choose their favourite

food

and the governments do not need to establish

the

Correct article usage

apply

show examples

laws to control it.