Part I
Some can argue that the intervention of government is unnecessary, as fast food companies are already starting to carry healthier options, such as apple slices and salads. Furthermore, many argue that obesity is merely the function of our bodies reacting to metabolic processes that lead to the health problems we see as a consequence of obesity. As such, the labeling of obesity as an 'epidemic' strains credulity, and involves targeting the symptoms of a disease, not the cure (Oliver, 2006). However, fast food items are still being prominently displayed, and there is a decided lack of advertisement regarding their healthier options, especially when compared to the main items like cheeseburger (Zinczenko, 2002). Drastic steps must be taken if, despite these healthier options, American citizens are not taking them and continuing their path to obesity.
Part II
Arthur, your prose needs a bit of work. First of all, I am not sure what the opposing viewpoint is - from what I can tell, you want to expand prison facilities, but this paragraph seems to be about preventing juveniles from entering the prison system. Furthermore, do not start the opposing viewpoint with a question - just state what the opposing viewpoint is, then provide evidence that shows the opponent's reasoning. You only have one citation or quote in here (which needs to be sealed in parenthetical marks, not just a closing parenthetical), and it discusses some vague 'movement' that has not been introduced. I would say that this paragraph is not effective at all, since I do not see an opposing argument to your thesis that prison facilities should be expanded. You mention things being 'facts' when, in fact, they are sweeping generalizations that do not have any documentation behind them.
-
Amy Collins
I feel you have a very strong counter argument here. It directly clashes with your thesis, and therefore discusses the other side of the coin. You have plenty of information here, all of it correctly cited and backed up with diverse sources. There are some grammar issues you could deal with, but those are minor. However, I am averse to the last sentence, which refers to the writer as a person in a collective 'we.' I feel the paper should present objective assessments outside the personality of the author, so keep it third-person.
