It is more important to spend public money on promoting a healthy lifestyle in order

to prevent illness than to spend it on treatment of people who are already ill. To what
extent do you agree or disagree?

It is true that maintaining effective public health services is extremely costly, and as a result
resources often target the treatment of illnesses rather than preventive medicine. While it is
essential to treat people who are ill, I agree with the view that much more emphasis should
be placed on promoting a healthy lifestyle.

On the one hand, the treatment of those who are sick cannot be neglected, and
governments must allocate resources to hospitals and clinics. Public money must also be
spent on searching for a cure for thousands of life-threatening conditions, such as cancers,
lung, and heart diseases or - in recent times - viral pandemics. Hundreds of millions of
people would die if no public money was devoted to providing treatment and finding cures to
alleviate suffering and disability.

On the other hand, I believe that governments should adopt policies to promote a healthy
lifestyle, without curbing public spending on the treatment of patients who are sick. Health
awareness campaigns must focus on diet and exercise. Firstly, the public should be
encouraged to eat a balanced diet, avoiding junk food from fast food chains. Such food is
one of the major reasons why so many people are prone to obesity. Secondly, public money
should also be used to encourage people to abandon a sedentary lifestyle. Without taking
regular exercise, people are likely to put on weight.

In conclusion, it need not cost a fortune to promote a healthy lifestyle which will carry fewer
health risks. I therefore agree that more public money should be spent on this strategy,
although I would argue that, at the same time, spending on treating illness should be
maintained.

Nâng cấp lập luận

Introduction: It is true that maintaining effective public health services is extremely costly,
and as a result resources often target the treatment of illnesses rather than preventive
medicine. While it is essential to treat people who are ill, I agree with the view that much
more emphasis should be placed on promoting a healthy lifestyle.

Feedback for Introduction:

Clear Position: The introduction effectively states your position by agreeing that more
emphasis should be placed on promoting a healthy lifestyle. This sets a clear direction for
the essay.

Relevance: The introduction is relevant to the essay question as it addresses the debate
between spending on treatment versus prevention. However, it could be more specific in
mentioning the reasons why you believe promoting a healthy lifestyle is more important.

Brief Overview: The introduction lacks a brief overview of the main points that will be
discussed in the essay. Including a sentence that outlines the key arguments you will
present, such as the benefits of promoting a healthy lifestyle and the importance of
balancing this with treatment, would provide a clearer roadmap for the reader.

Improved Introduction: In today's society, the allocation of public funds for healthcare is a
pressing concern. While it is crucial to provide adequate treatment for those already afflicted,
I firmly believe that a greater emphasis should be placed on promoting a healthy lifestyle.
This approach not only reduces the incidence of illnesses but also alleviates the financial
burden on healthcare systems. This essay will argue that investing in preventive measures is
more effective than solely focusing on treating illnesses, and will discuss the strategies and
benefits of promoting a healthy lifestyle.

Main Point 1: On the one hand, the treatment of those who are sick cannot be neglected,
and governments must allocate resources to hospitals and clinics. Public money must also
be spent on searching for a cure for thousands of life-threatening conditions, such as
cancers, lung, and heart diseases or - in recent times - viral pandemics. Hundreds of millions
of people would die if no public money was devoted to providing treatment and finding cures
to alleviate suffering and disability.

Feedback for Main Point 1:

Argumentative Logic: The argument effectively highlights the necessity of allocating

resources for the treatment of illnesses, emphasizing the dire consequences of neglecting
medical care. The logical flow from the need for treatment to the potential catastrophic
outcomes without it is clear and compelling.

Overgeneralizations: The statement that "hundreds of millions of people would die if no

public money was devoted to providing treatment and finding cures" is an
overgeneralization. While it's true that significant resources are needed for medical care, the
impact of not having these resources is not universally catastrophic. The argument could
benefit from acknowledging that while severe, the consequences of inadequate medical care
vary depending on the specific conditions and the availability of alternative care options.

Relevance and Effectiveness of Supporting Ideas: The supporting ideas are relevant and
effectively illustrate the importance of medical treatment. However, the argument could be
strengthened by discussing specific examples of how these resources have led to significant
improvements in healthcare outcomes or by contrasting these with the potential outcomes
without such investments.

Unclear or Ambiguous Expressions: The expression is generally clear, but the phrase
"life-threatening conditions" could be more specific to enhance clarity. Specifying types of
conditions or diseases would help readers understand the scope of the argument more
clearly.

Unwarranted Assumptions: The argument assumes that the absence of public funding for
medical research and treatment would lead to a catastrophic loss of life. This assumption
overlooks the potential for private funding or international aid that could mitigate some of
these effects.

Overly Assertive Language: The definitive statement about the consequences of not
having public funding for medical care could be softened to acknowledge the complexity of
healthcare systems and the potential for alternative solutions.

Overall Evaluation: Well Extended and Supported

Suggestions for Improvement:

Detail Specific Healthcare Outcomes: Provide more detailed examples of how public
funding has led to specific improvements in healthcare outcomes, such as increased survival
rates or reduced morbidity.
Introduce Alternative Funding Sources: Discuss the role of private funding, international
aid, or other sources that could supplement public funding, providing a more balanced view
of the healthcare landscape.

Clarify and Specify Conditions: Use more specific language to describe the types of
conditions that are critical to address, such as specific cancers or infectious diseases, to
make the argument more concrete and relatable.

Balance the Argument: Acknowledge the importance of both treatment and prevention in
healthcare, suggesting that a balanced approach could be more effective than focusing
solely on one aspect. This would provide a more nuanced and comprehensive view of
healthcare policy.

Improved Main Point 1: While it is crucial to allocate resources for the treatment of
illnesses, particularly for life-threatening conditions such as cancers, lung, and heart
diseases, and recent pandemics, it is equally important to recognize the dire consequences
of neglecting medical care. Without sufficient public funding for treatment and research,
hundreds of millions of people could face severe health outcomes, including death. This
underscores the necessity for continued investment in healthcare infrastructure and research
to ensure the well-being of the population.

Main Point 2: On the other hand, I believe that governments should adopt policies to
promote a healthy lifestyle, without curbing public spending on the treatment of patients who
are sick. Health awareness campaigns must focus on diet and exercise. Firstly, the public
should be encouraged to eat a balanced diet, avoiding junk food from fast food chains. Such
food is one of the major reasons why so many people are prone to obesity. Secondly, public
money should also be used to encourage people to abandon a sedentary lifestyle. Without
taking regular exercise, people are likely to put on weight.

Feedback for Main Point 2:

Argumentative Logic: The argument effectively highlights the importance of promoting a

healthy lifestyle through diet and exercise, emphasizing the role of public health campaigns
in preventing illnesses. The logical flow from the need for healthy lifestyles to the allocation
of public funds is clear and well-structured.

Overgeneralizations: The statement that junk food from fast food chains is a major reason
for obesity might be an overgeneralization. While it's a significant factor, it's not the sole
cause of obesity, and the argument could benefit from acknowledging other contributing
factors like genetics, socioeconomic conditions, and cultural influences.

Relevance and Effectiveness of Supporting Ideas: The supporting ideas are relevant and
effectively illustrate the main point. The specific examples of promoting balanced diets and
regular exercise are directly relevant and enhance the argument's persuasiveness.

Unclear or Ambiguous Expressions: The expressions used are clear and effectively
communicate the intended message. However, the term "sedentary lifestyle" could be more
specific to enhance clarity, such as "a lifestyle characterized by minimal physical activity."

Unwarranted Assumptions: The argument assumes that public health campaigns alone
can significantly impact lifestyle changes without considering the complexity of behavioral
changes and the role of individual choices and environmental factors.

Overly Assertive Language: The language used is appropriately assertive for the argument
being made. However, introducing qualifiers like "can" or "could" when discussing the
effectiveness of health campaigns would acknowledge the variability in individual responses
to such initiatives.

Overall Evaluation: Well Extended and Supported

Suggestions for Improvement:

Broaden the Discussion: Expand the discussion to include other aspects of promoting
healthy lifestyles, such as environmental factors that influence food choices and physical
activity opportunities.

Introduce Broader Solutions: Suggest additional strategies beyond health awareness

campaigns, such as policy changes that support healthy food options in schools and
workplaces or community programs that encourage physical activity.

Clarify and Specify Terms: Use more precise language to describe lifestyle changes, such
as "a diet rich in fruits and vegetables" instead of "a balanced diet."

Acknowledge Challenges: Discuss the challenges in implementing and sustaining such

campaigns, such as funding constraints and the need for long-term commitment from
governments and the public.

Improved Main Point 2: In promoting a healthy lifestyle, governments should prioritize

public health campaigns that focus on dietary habits and physical activity. These initiatives
should encourage the public to adopt balanced diets, avoiding junk food from fast food
chains, which is a significant contributor to obesity. Additionally, public funds should support
programs that encourage regular exercise, as a sedentary lifestyle often leads to weight
gain. While it's essential to continue treating those who are ill, allocating resources to
prevent illnesses through lifestyle changes can significantly reduce the need for costly
medical interventions in the long run.

Conclusion: In conclusion, it need not cost a fortune to promote a healthy lifestyle which will
carry fewer health risks. I therefore agree that more public money should be spent on this
strategy, although I would argue that, at the same time, spending on treating illness should
be maintained.

Feedback for Conclusion:

Clear Position: The conclusion clearly states your position that more public money should
be spent on promoting a healthy lifestyle, while also acknowledging the importance of
maintaining spending on treating illnesses. This balanced view is well-articulated and aligns
with the essay's argument. However, the conclusion could be strengthened by more
explicitly stating the extent to which you agree or disagree with the original statement, as per
the essay prompt.

Relevance: The conclusion is relevant to the essay's discussion on the allocation of public
funds between preventive and curative healthcare. It effectively summarizes your stance on
the issue, which is a key element of a strong IELTS conclusion. To enhance its relevance,
you could briefly recap the main points discussed in the essay that support your position,
such as the benefits of promoting a healthy lifestyle and the necessity of treating illnesses.
This would provide a more comprehensive closure to the argument and directly address the
essay prompt's question.

Improved Conclusion: In conclusion, while it is crucial to maintain spending on treating

illnesses, I believe that more public funds should be allocated to promoting a healthy
lifestyle. This approach not only reduces health risks but also alleviates the financial burden
on healthcare systems. A balanced strategy that addresses both prevention and treatment is
essential for optimal public health outcomes.

Task Response
Band Score for Task Response: 8

Answer All Parts of the Question:

Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses the prompt by acknowledging both
sides of the argument regarding the allocation of public funds. The writer clearly states their
position in favor of promoting a healthy lifestyle while recognizing the necessity of treating
illnesses. The discussion includes relevant points about the importance of treatment and
prevention, which shows a balanced approach. However, the essay could benefit from a
more explicit acknowledgment of the extent to which the writer agrees or disagrees with the
statement, as the prompt asks for a degree of agreement.

How to improve: To enhance the response, the writer could explicitly state their degree of
agreement in the introduction and conclusion. For example, they could clarify whether they
believe the focus on prevention should be significantly greater or just somewhat greater than
treatment. This would provide a clearer answer to the prompt's request for the extent of
agreement.

Present a Clear Position Throughout:

Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position that emphasizes the importance
of promoting a healthy lifestyle while also recognizing the need for treatment. The writer's
stance is consistent throughout the essay, particularly in the introduction and conclusion.
However, the transition between the two perspectives could be smoother, as the shift from
discussing treatment to prevention feels somewhat abrupt.

How to improve: To improve clarity and coherence, the writer could use transitional phrases
that signal the shift in focus, such as "While treatment is crucial, it is equally important to..."
This would help guide the reader through the argument and reinforce the overall position
more effectively.

Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:

Detailed explanation: The essay presents several ideas related to promoting a healthy
lifestyle, such as encouraging a balanced diet and regular exercise. These points are
relevant and supported by examples, which strengthens the argument. However, the essay
could benefit from further elaboration on how these initiatives could be implemented or their
potential impact on public health.

How to improve: To enhance the development of ideas, the writer could include specific
examples of successful health campaigns or policies from different countries. Additionally,
discussing the potential long-term benefits of investing in prevention, such as reduced
healthcare costs and improved quality of life, would provide a more comprehensive support
for their argument.

Stay on Topic:
Detailed explanation: The essay remains focused on the topic throughout, discussing both
the importance of treatment and the need for preventive measures. There are no significant
deviations from the topic, and each paragraph contributes to the overall argument. However,
the conclusion could be more directly tied back to the prompt by reiterating the main points
made in the essay.

How to improve: In the conclusion, the writer should summarize the key arguments made in
the body paragraphs and explicitly restate their position regarding the balance between
prevention and treatment. This would reinforce the essay's focus and ensure that the reader
is left with a clear understanding of the writer's stance on the issue.

Coherence & Cohesion

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 8

Organize Information Logically:

Detailed explanation: The essay is organized in a logical manner, presenting a clear

argument that acknowledges both sides of the issue. The introduction succinctly states the
writer's position, while the body paragraphs effectively separate the discussion of treatment
and prevention. For example, the first body paragraph discusses the necessity of treating
illnesses, while the second focuses on promoting a healthy lifestyle. This clear division aids
the reader in following the argument.

How to improve: To enhance logical flow, the writer could include more explicit linking
phrases between the paragraphs to guide the reader through the argument. For instance,
using phrases like "In addition to the need for treatment," at the beginning of the second
body paragraph could strengthen the connection between the two points.

Use Paragraphs:

Detailed explanation: The essay effectively uses paragraphs to separate distinct ideas,
which contributes to clarity. Each paragraph has a clear main idea, supported by relevant
examples. The introduction and conclusion are also well-defined, framing the argument
effectively. However, the second body paragraph could be further divided to separate the
two main points about diet and exercise, which would enhance readability.

How to improve: Consider breaking the second body paragraph into two separate
paragraphs—one focusing on diet and the other on exercise. This would allow for a more
detailed exploration of each point and improve the overall structure of the essay.

Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:

Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good range of cohesive devices, such as
"On the one hand," "On the other hand," and "Firstly," which help to guide the reader through
the argument. These devices effectively signal shifts in the discussion and clarify the
relationship between ideas. However, the essay could benefit from a wider variety of
cohesive devices to avoid repetition and enhance fluidity.

How to improve: To diversify the use of cohesive devices, the writer could incorporate
synonyms or alternative phrases. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "public money,"
the writer could use "government funding" or "state resources." Additionally, using more
transitional phrases like "Furthermore," "Moreover," or "In contrast," could help to create
smoother transitions between ideas and paragraphs.
Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong command of coherence and cohesion, with clear
organization and effective use of paragraphs and cohesive devices. With minor adjustments
in linking phrases, paragraph structure, and the variety of cohesive devices, the essay could
achieve an even higher level of coherence and cohesion.

Lexical Resource
Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:

Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable range of vocabulary relevant

to the topic, such as "public health services," "preventive medicine," "health awareness
campaigns," and "sedentary lifestyle." However, the vocabulary tends to be somewhat
repetitive, particularly in phrases like "public money" and "treatment of illnesses." The use of
synonyms or more varied expressions could enhance the lexical diversity.

How to improve: To improve, the writer should aim to incorporate a broader range of
synonyms and phrases. For instance, instead of repeatedly using "public money,"
alternatives like "government funding" or "state resources" could be employed. Additionally,
introducing more sophisticated vocabulary related to health and economics could elevate the
essay's lexical range.

Use Vocabulary Precisely:

Detailed explanation: The essay generally uses vocabulary accurately, but there are
instances where precision could be improved. For example, the phrase "searching for a cure
for thousands of life-threatening conditions" could be more specific by mentioning
"researching treatments" or "developing therapies" instead of the more vague "searching for
a cure." Furthermore, the term "abandon a sedentary lifestyle" could be replaced with
"reduce sedentary behavior" for greater clarity.

How to improve: To enhance precision, the writer should focus on selecting words that
convey the intended meaning more clearly. Engaging with a thesaurus to find more precise
terms or consulting academic sources on health-related vocabulary can help refine word
choice. Additionally, practicing paraphrasing could aid in finding more accurate expressions.

Use Correct Spelling:

Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a good level of spelling accuracy, with no
significant errors that impede understanding. Words such as "obesity," "exercise," and
"lifestyle" are spelled correctly throughout the text. However, there are minor issues, such as
the phrase "need not cost a fortune," which could be misread if not punctuated correctly, as
it may confuse readers about the intended meaning.

How to improve: To further enhance spelling accuracy, the writer should proofread the
essay carefully, focusing on punctuation and ensuring that complex phrases are clearly
articulated. Utilizing spell-check tools and engaging in regular writing practice can also help
solidify spelling skills. Additionally, reading more extensively can improve familiarity with
correct spelling in context.

In summary, while the essay demonstrates a solid understanding of the topic and employs
relevant vocabulary, there is room for improvement in terms of lexical range, precision, and
spelling accuracy. By diversifying vocabulary, selecting more precise terms, and ensuring
correct spelling and punctuation, the writer can enhance the overall quality of their writing
and potentially achieve a higher band score.

Grammatical Range & Accuracy

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

Use a Wide Range of Structures:

Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a good variety of sentence structures,

including complex sentences and conditional clauses. For instance, phrases like "while it is
essential to treat people who are ill" and "without curbing public spending on the treatment of
patients who are sick" effectively showcase the use of subordinate clauses. However, the
essay could benefit from more varied sentence openings and the incorporation of more
advanced structures, such as inversion or participial phrases, to further enhance complexity.

How to improve: To diversify sentence structures, the writer could practice using different
sentence beginnings and integrating more complex grammatical forms. For example, instead
of starting sentences with the subject, the writer could begin with an adverbial phrase (e.g.,
"In light of recent health crises, it is imperative that..."). Additionally, incorporating more
varied conjunctions and relative clauses could enhance the complexity of the writing.

Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:

Detailed explanation: The essay generally demonstrates a strong command of grammar

and punctuation, with only minor errors. For instance, the phrase "such as cancers, lung,
and heart diseases" could be improved for clarity by rephrasing it to "such as cancer, lung
diseases, and heart diseases." Additionally, the use of commas is mostly accurate, although
the sentence "such food is one of the major reasons why so many people are prone to
obesity" could benefit from a comma before "why" to separate the clauses more clearly.

How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, the writer should focus on

proofreading for common errors, particularly in subject-verb agreement and article usage.
Practicing sentence combining and breaking down complex sentences into simpler ones can
also help clarify meaning and reduce the likelihood of grammatical mistakes. Furthermore,
reviewing punctuation rules, especially regarding the use of commas in complex sentences,
will aid in achieving greater accuracy.

In summary, while the essay achieves a solid Band 7 in Grammatical Range and Accuracy,
there is room for improvement in diversifying sentence structures and refining grammatical
precision. By focusing on these areas, the writer can enhance the overall quality of their
writing.

Bài chữa tham khảo

It is true that maintaining effective public health services is extremely costly, and as a result,
resources often prioritize the treatment of illnesses over preventive medicine. While it is
essential to treat people who are ill, I concur that much more emphasis should be placed on
promoting a healthy lifestyle.

On the one hand, the treatment of those who are sick cannot be overlooked, and
governments must allocate resources to hospitals and clinics. Public funds should also be
spent on researching and developing cures for numerous life-threatening conditions, such as
cancers, lung diseases, and heart diseases, or, in recent times, viral pandemics. Hundreds
of millions of people would perish if no public funds were allocated for treatment and cure
development to alleviate suffering and disability.

On the other hand, I advocate for governments to implement policies promoting a healthy
lifestyle, without compromising public spending on the treatment of patients who are ill.
Health awareness campaigns should focus on promoting healthy diets and regular exercise.
Firstly, the public should be encouraged to eat a balanced diet, avoiding junk food from fast
food chains. Such food is a significant contributor to the prevalence of obesity among many
people. Secondly, public money should also be used to encourage people to abandon a
sedentary lifestyle. Without regular exercise, individuals are likely to gain weight.

In conclusion, it does not necessarily require significant expenditure to promote a healthy

lifestyle, which will carry fewer health risks. I therefore agree that additional public funds
should be allocated for this strategy, although I would argue that, concurrently, funding for
treating illnesses should be sustained.

Từ vựng tham khảo

Word Meaning and Example

preventative (Phòng ngừa) Intended to stop something

from happening. Example: Many healthcare
programs focus on _______ measures to
reduce the risk of illness.

allocate (Phân bổ) To distribute resources or duties

for a specific purpose. Example: The
government should _______ more funds to
promote healthy lifestyles.

morbidity (Tỷ lệ mắc bệnh) The state of being

diseased or the incidence of disease in a
population. Example: High _______ rates
can strain public health resources.

intervention (Can thiệp) Actions taken to improve a

situation, especially in healthcare. Example:
Early _______ can lead to better health
outcomes for communities.

longevity (Tuổi thọ) The length of time that a person

lives or a thing lasts. Example: A healthy
diet can significantly increase _______ and
quality of life.
Word Meaning and Example

expenditure (Chi tiêu) The action of spending funds;

total spending. Example: Public _______ on
health promotion can yield long-term
savings by reducing treatment costs.

holistic (Toàn diện) Considering the whole rather

than just parts; in health, it refers to overall
well-being. Example: A _______ approach
to health considers both physical and
mental wellness.

epidemiology (Dịch tễ học) The branch of medicine that

deals with the incidence, distribution, and
control of diseases. Example: _______
research helps identify health risks in
populations.

lifestyle (Lối sống) The way in which a person or

group lives, including habits, attitudes, and
values. Example: An active _______ is
essential for preventing chronic diseases.

rehabilitation (Chấn thương phục hồi) A process aimed at

restoring health and functional ability after
illness or injury. Example: Public funding for
_______ can improve recovery rates for
patients.