Some people say that the best way to improve public health is by increasing the number of sports facilities. Others, however, say that this would have little effect on public health and that other measures are required. 

Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. 

Answer:

People have contrasting views on public health. (There is no need to write this sentence. You’re already expressing contrast in the next sentence. Your essay is already too long – 328 words. Avoid unnecessary sentences.) While some would (would is unnecessary in this context.) argue that it can be improved by increasing sports facilities as it (Oh no! – 1) will encourage public to develop their interest towards a healthy lifestyle, I firmly believe that it will not solve the purpose and some other solutions (name them) are required because everybody is unique and suffering suffers with different illness. proliferation

1. In a sentence, one pronoun can refer to one noun only. In the former part, ‘IT’ refers to public health, in the latter part – sports facilities. This is a grammar mistake.

Let us rewrite a shorter introduction without losing ideas: Some people argue that increasing enhancing sports infrastructure improves people’s health by encouraging them to exercise frequently. I believe this is a flawed view and other factors such as a healthy diet and jogging tracks have a deeper impact on public health. (Reserve UNIQUENESS and ILLNESS of people for the body paragraphs. Do not state them in the introduction. Just MENTION the factors. Keep it short.)

The overall health of citizens could (Can vs Could – understand the difference.) can be improved by maximizing the provision of sports. That is to say that (2) if the sports activity option proliferates (Sports can’t proliferate. Wrong word choice. Please read this word’s exact meaning in the dictionary.), a number of people will engage themselves in some kind of physical exercise, which as a result which (bad use of connectors.) makes people fit and active. (3) In India, for example, the Delhi government has recently provided the installed (Use the most appropriate word. The use of the is wrong.) gym equipment in most of the parks for free of cost, and this move has fascinated (Fascination is not same as participation. Not the best word choice.) encouraged many men and women, who could can (can vs could) not afford gym fees. (4) However, I still feel this action would will not improve people‘s well-being, therefore, there should be something through which everyone can take benefit. (There is no need to write the last sentence. It should better be written at the beginning of the next body paragraph.)

2. This is completely unnecessary. Most students think that this promotes cohesion. Well, it does not. Rather, the examiner reads this as your inability to connect sentences.

3. Let us re-write the sentence in a SPECIFIC manner.: The availability of facilities such as football grounds, tennis courts, badminton nets, and chess tables encourages people to exert their physical and mental energies positively.

4. Restructure: The Delhi government has installed open-air gyms in almost all the parks of the city where the residents, who do not exercise on a regular basis, (adjective clause) workout during the evening walk.

Every individual has his own problem which cannot be solved just by introducing the sports options for them.(While there is no need to write a pronoun here, using a wrong pronoun will cost you GR bands. Them refers to a plural noun. But, your subject – every individual – is singular. Subject-pronoun disagreement.) In simple words, (Unnecessary and weird.) everybody’s body requirement is not same, and some people do not like to enrol themselves for fitness club or sports complex because of their age and disability. Many people who are disabled or old or suffer from a congenital disease can not play sports. Rather, they need a nourishing and balanced diet. While an increase in the number of sports complexes helps only those who are already motivated to stay fit, ensuring organic, pesticide-free food helps everyone including children, elderly and terminally ill patients. (Build an argument.) For instance, according to the extensive research conducted by WHO revealed (According can’t reveal. Extensive research can.) that 67% of people prefer to attend health seminars rather than physical exercise. (This is not an example. You’ve just stated numbers.) Personally, (Personally = I. This is a tautology.) I strongly believe that sports facilities would do not persuade citizens, and free health consultation and medicines would will be a better option to improve the citizen’s health. (The last sentence of this has close resemblance with the last sentence of the previous paragraph. This is a repetition. Unnecessary words. Just like unnecessary body fat. Examiners do not like this.)

In conclusion, some would argue that for the betterment of common people fitness, sports facilities should be increased because this will motivate them to pursue a healthy life. I, however, believe that this will not solve the cause (You can’t SOLVE a cause. You can solve a problem or serve a purpose/ cause.) as those who are old and physically challenged cannot go for the sports activities, hence some free health care services should be provided by the government.

Observe that your conclusion is the same as the introduction. Most students commit this mistake. Even if you want to convey the same ideas, convey them smartly. Let me suggest:

In conclusion, if the government focuses solely on expanding sports infrastructure, it will benefit only a fraction of citizens. A more prudent approach is to take better care of the weaker sections of society.