Writing Feedback / IELTS WRITING TASK 2! Can you guess which band? [2]

Task 2:
Scientific research should be carried out and controlled by the governments rather than private companies.

Do you agree or disagree?

The question of whether scientific research is funded by the government or private companies has been a controversial topic. In my opinion, I completely agree with the former as governments could collaborate with other countries and look for sponsorships easily.

Admittedly, there are many good reasons to say that scientific research which is carried out by the government can be beneficial. Chief of these is that it is straightforward for governments when having a collaboration with other nations. Granted, when doing research, there would have the lack of types of equipment and scientists, thus, such a demand can be accepted because countries can compensate the lack of each other and both can be benefitted. For example, America and Australia collaborated with their primary aim is to upgrade the spaceships which can help them to find more answers about Mars. However, as for private firms, it is such a challenging task for them because some of them do not have enough reputation, so foreign companies can have some reluctance when having a contract to collab.

Furthermore, when doing scientific research, governments could ask for sponsorships easier than the way private companies do. This is predicated on the assumption that there are other needed areas have to be subsidized such as environment, or education, therefore, the investment in scientific research is not enough. This, according to this theory, looking for a sponsorship is utterly necessary, and the public is those who can sponsor the government's project. In other words, people can put faith in their countries, so the vast majority of them are keen on serving due to their pride in being a citizen of their nations. Private companies, on the other hand, it is hard for them to find a sponsorship because not many people or firms can even think this research can become successful, thus, it is a waste of money to spend on.

In conclusion, I would argue that scientific research should be done by the government because they have more good relationships with other countries, and more trusts that the public are willing to assist, compared to private corporations.

(351 words)

Writing Feedback / The investment in health promotion is more crucial than the treatment of people who are already ill [3]

IELTS WRITING TASK 2 - money for health care

It is more important to spend public money on promoting a healthy lifestyle in order to prevent illness than to spend it on treatment It is believed that the investment of money in health promotion is more crucial than the treatment of people who are already ill To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is believed that the investment of money in health promotion is more crucial than the treatment of people who are already ill. In my opinion, I disagree with this view as both the former and the latter have the same importance.

Admittedly, there are many good reasons to say that spending money on enhancing a healthy lifestyle is a good way to prevent us from illness. This is predicated on the assumption that when we have healthy diets, and do exercises on a regular basis can improve our overall health. One might argue that only those who have enough finance can purchase salubrious food, and equipment to do exercises. However, this line of reasoning is not sound as people can eat at home, which is cheaper than using fast food and readily-made meals, and they can resort to do other cost-effective activities such as running or jogging rather than doing gym.

I am of the opinion that ill people need to have treatments and be spent an equal amount of money. The key reason is there are certain kinds of people should have special treatments. For example, those suffering from incurable diseases such as heart disease or cardiovascular disease, their bodies are required to undergo various treatment stages with medical equipment. Moreover, in economically disadvantaged countries, the phenomenon of lacking medical equiments and budget to meet the requirements of treatment is apparent, thus, spending money on treating ill people is utterly necessary.

In conclusion, both peoples's lifestyles and treatments should be funded equally as the former can help us reduce the potential of suffering while the latter could help patients have better methodologies to cure.