Shops should be allowd to sell products which it is not scientifically proven! 

Some people think that shops should not be allowed to sell food and drinks that are scientifically proven to be bad for people’s health. Do you agree or disagree?

There are a number of people who suggest that supermarkets should not be allowed to sell food and other kinds of beverages that are proven to be bad for for people’s health. So i totally agree with this statement, as i will argue this point in details as following;

Nowadays, we believe that traders do not concentrate on people’s health, but they are only focus on strartegies how to heap up money, and this is what they care about. However, their priority is the money, as they look for consumers’s health as a secondary condition.

In addition, there is a recent reports came out from the ministry of food and health, that market sell products such as; some of canned fruits, and canned beans, it has approved that it should not be sold to consumers, as it contains on high chemical conservatives, which it will lead to destroy human’s health, as a result, it may cause a dangerous disease in stomach which it is cancer ailment. Although the ministry warn them from selling it to people, but they still display on shelves. They become careless to human health, because they focus on money. Recently, it was notified that few supermarkets were caught selling these products, as a consequence, it was closed because they violated rules of health equality.

In adition, health food controller is working strictly against those shops to ensure food quality, hence, any shops violate the rule, they will be exposed to pay fine and closing the concerned supermarket. Furthermore, the rule is applied on beverages as well. It should be there a test done in the lab for new items before distributing it to retailers. In case, items do not match human’s consumption standards, it should be damaged accordingly. In recent researches showed that some people were poisoned due to eating corned beef, after it was checked, they had found that it manufactured and canned by dogs meat instead of cows meat. They added that they found raw tunas and it contained on high percentage of bacteria , as it was not cooked well.

To conclude, food quality controller should take a strict actions against retailers who sell unregistered items, As it should undergo tests and analysis into depth before selling it to consumers.” Human Health IS FIRST”

Aim of university education is not only to help graduates get better jobs! 

Some people believe the aim of university education is to help graduates get better jobs. Others believe there are much wider benefits of university education for both individuals and society.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.

We have two groups of people have different point of views, the first group believe the goal of university education is to support graduaters for having suitable jobs, and the second group believe that there are enormous of advantages when completing higher education either for matures or community. Therefore, I will discuss here the two perspectives in details as following;

First of all, the first group who find out that continuing up university education gives more opportunities for obtaining jobs which it relates to the field which they have studied at the universty. Recently, students are aware of selecting what to study in the university, as each student has different interest in such field. For example, some students go through labour market requirments, so that they study a field which it is possibly to be paid more wages in the market, which it has also constant vacancies to avoid unemployment features. However, they look for a workplace where they can achieve comfortness and relaxation environment. In addition, they like to work in an environment where open minded people work. As it could be counted as self advantage relates to the person himself or herself only.

And the second view, there are a group of people believe that finishing university eduation, it will be there a kind of mutual benefits for individuals and the society as well, because a country needs to have different professions in different fields. For example, it is important that the country should have doctor practioners whicg it is an essential part that it should be existed in it, when people got sick, they will have to visit the doctor to diagnose one’s case and prescribe for them the medicine to be cured from a certain type of disease. In addition, community requires teachers to teach other pupils. However, when graduaters focus only to study specific fileds, certainly it will cause lack of professions in the society. As a result, we can see some organisations have shortage of employees, they can not find people to work with them. It really happened in some countries with the ministry of education, they could not find teachers to hire them, because there no one apply for it due to the weakness of salaries.

I think, education does not involve individuals for achieving their goals only, but the society has to have a balance between all majors to fulfill needs of society for the best of the conutry.

In brief, it is very necessary to make a parallel in professions for the purpose of having a better society not only to look for self interest, because we are part of the community, we should take care of this point.

Words are stronger than sticks and stones to break bones! 

Hold you breath, and count to ten before saying anything to a certain person.

When you need to talk to someone, think of what are you going to say for them. Because words if go out of your mouth, it will not come back again, it could hurt them, if you say something wrong, even you don’t mean that, but people don’t understand that you said that spontaneously. So it will be there passive consequences over you, words could break bones more than sticks and stones! 

Finally, we are responsible of what we say, we have to be aware in selecting the word before uttering it.


People advise you to go through the straight path, they start teaching you about ethics, but they do not really apply it themselves.!

Basically, when you watch them what they do, you see something different of what they have said, as you see them doing bad behaviours and wrong things, how come, they guide you and advise you to the right direction, and they don’t follow the right way. !!! 

Why do they do that?! 

School and parents have an integral role to train children about recycling of waste items

Almost everyone agrees that we should be training children to recycle waste to save the Earth’s natural resources. Some believe that it is parents who should teach their children to recycle waste. Others argue that school is the best place to teach do this. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

We have two different perspectives who should train immature for recycling waste . On the one hand, people believe that children need to be taught by parents how to save the enviroment in part of natural resources. On the scond hand, others argue that immature should learn it while attending school. Actually, both sides have vital role for increasing children’s awareness with regards to natural resources.

To beging, children grow up on things that they have learnt during childhood, either by their parents or at schools. As a consequence, we tend to believe that children should learn these basic things in life about how to save the enviroment from destruction by reducing waste items. Teaching them how to segregate materials according each concept. For example, parents who care about how to have a clean environment, they should have a different container to each category, such as; one trash pin for empty glass bottles, and one for plastic containers, and other for metal items. In this process, their awareness about recycling waste will be increased, they can also watch them if they throw in the right area. In case, they did not pin it in the right place, they would inform to take it out and throw it again into the proper container. In addition, parents should enlighten them about the benefit of recycling of waste, and passive consequences which it may lead to climate change in the future , if we would not be aware about waste, informing them that it could be resued again by companies to make it again, so that it can be used by human in the future, as it will help avoid global warming. Knowing, parents should encourage their children not buy unnecessary items to alleviate from wastage.

While school has an essential part in turning children to the right direction. As It should have courses included to its curriculum about the nature, and how to protect it from devestating. It can add clear pictures to the course about recycling of waste. Furthermore, it should increase awareness of children and teaching them about how unnecssary items could affect earth’s nature. However, education has power in affecting on children’s mind to have positive thoughts toward earth, and what kind of methods or strategies can be taken to avoid climate change in the future.

In brief, schools and parents should have perfect tactics to children guidance, and the benefits of recycling waste.

Government should give money to creative people who work in arts! 

Some people think that the government should give money to creative people, such as artists and musicians. To what extent do you agree?

There are a certain number of people believe that government should invest money to art, therefore, i disagree with this statement. I will come with details as following;

On the first hand, government should have make a balance between arts and other parts . As it should classify things as per the importance. For example, science is the most inportant field that conutry should take care about. Creating methods by using science field to helps us to improve the enviroment of the country. It was mentioned that there are scientists, they have come with inventing devices which it can support to clear air pollution which it results from fossil fuel. Unfortunately, their ideas have not been supported to invent it. However, government must have set an eye for them because they can be counted as creative people as well. So keeping a proportion of money to be invested for them is a good idea. So it has to work to adopt their inventions for the future for getting better situation and enviroment. In addition, if it did not work on them to take them as advantage, undoudtedly, their thoughts and ideas would be burried forever. As a consequence, there will be a reason for leaving the origin country. As a result, the country will lose them as well. However, government should make a balance, not by giving attention only on art and ignoring other important sides.

On the second hand, arts are also an essential area, so making another proportion of money investment to this domain, it would motivate artists and musicians to do something for the country, As they can be counted as talents people. In addition, arts play an integral role  in reflecting the image of the country. Therefore, it reflects about traditions of the country and its civilisation.

In brief, making a balance between both sides will assist the country from losing them in future. As a result, they might be a useful asset. Notably, it should not take care of one part, and neglect anothor part.

It Takes Courage – and Maybe Some Tulips

In The Corner

I cancelled my appointment with Dr. Singh on Wednesday.  I just didn’t have the guts to find out how I was doing.  You’d think that I’d be used to it by now – once a month appointments.  Nope.  Every visit is tough.  No – that’s not right.  It’s not the visit that is tough – it is having courage to go to an appointment that is tough.  Afterall, I’m given the verdict of “you are doing well” or “your cancer is back”.  Either way, I trust my doctor.  I have faith in her.  That’s not really the issue.  I think it’s just finding out that the tiny plans that you may / may not have made for the upcoming week/ month/ summer may change.

Dr. Singh’s office called that very afternoon I didn’t show.  So, what did I think?  “This can’t be good.  Why is she so desperate to see…

View original post 807 more words

Aid to poorer countries 

It is a moral duty of developed countries to provide aid to poorer countries. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of aiding poorer countries?

Aid is a pure moral task of developed contries to provide it to poorer conutries. Therefore, i will argue here pros and cons of aiding poorer conutries as following;

On the first hand, aid is a positive thing that it could be provided to help weak countries, which they have a short of medical staff, and modernized equipment to supply them. For example, one of the most famous organisation which it works in aiding, it is red crescent organisation which it has a lot of members around the world. It works to save people health either from nature disasters such as; earthquake, and floods, or wars. In addition, the source of this idea is western, and the greatest thing that it has covered non western countries as well, it was marked by red crescent symbol to protect them during wars. Notably, this symbol is sticked behind medics team’s jackets, or in ambulances, so that they can be recognised easily. Furthermore, this organisation has offered full assistance to give treatment to serious injuries, and recollcate them to safer places in the country. It has also provided free ambulances to serve poorer countries. As well as it has employed a professional team to provide the help perfectly. Knowing, medics team should be neautral regardless, race, religion, language, and sex.

On the contrary, medics are exposed to dangerous situation, and it is poosible to be killed during catastrophe. As a result, it will be there a kind of loss for the number of medics during disasters.

In brief, aid is the best method to help poorer countries to survive from death. However, aid does not stand only on medics, but it could be food, and medicines supplying.