Cambridge 16 Writing Task 2 Test 3 - Sample Answers (Band 9 to 4-5)

Excessive sugar consumption is linked to serious health problems such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and dental decay, and I strongly agree that raising the price of sugary products through taxation is an effective way to reduce consumption, although I believe pricing alone is not a complete solution.

There is compelling evidence that price increases genuinely change consumer behaviour. Mexico, for example, introduced a tax on sugary drinks in 2014, and subsequent studies found that purchases of taxed beverages fell measurably in the years that followed, particularly among lower-income households who are typically the most price-sensitive. This demonstrates that when the cost of an unhealthy choice rises relative to healthier alternatives, many consumers do genuinely adjust their spending habits rather than simply absorbing the additional cost.

Beyond changing individual behaviour, such taxes also generate substantial government revenue that can be reinvested directly into public health initiatives, such as nutrition education programmes in schools or subsidies for fresh fruit and vegetables, creating a virtuous cycle in which the policy funds its own complementary interventions.

However, I do not believe pricing alone is sufficient. Some studies suggest that heavier long-term users of sugary products, who may be the least health-conscious to begin with, sometimes simply absorb modest price increases without changing their habits, meaning the health benefits accrue disproportionately to price-sensitive groups rather than universally. For this reason, I believe sugar taxes work best when combined with clear nutrition labelling and public education campaigns that explain the health risks directly, rather than being relied upon as a standalone solution.

In conclusion, I agree that making sugary products more expensive is a valuable and evidence-backed public health tool, but it should be implemented alongside education and labelling initiatives rather than in isolation, since price alone cannot address every driver of excessive sugar consumption.

Sugar consumption is linked to health problems such as obesity and diabetes, and I agree that making sugary products more expensive would help reduce how much sugar people consume, although I do not think higher prices alone are enough.

There is good evidence that higher prices do change people's behaviour. For example, Mexico introduced a tax on sugary drinks a few years ago, and studies afterwards showed that people bought fewer of these drinks, especially in lower-income households. This shows that when sugary products cost more, many people really do buy less of them.

Taxes on sugary products also raise money for the government, which can be used for other health programmes, such as teaching children about healthy eating in schools or making fruit and vegetables cheaper.

However, I do not think higher prices alone solve the problem completely. Some people who consume a lot of sugar may simply continue buying these products even if the price increases, so the benefits may not reach everyone equally. For this reason, I think sugar taxes work best alongside health education and clear labelling on food packaging.

In conclusion, I agree that increasing the price of sugary products is a useful way to reduce consumption, but I believe it should be combined with education, not used as the only solution. Countries considering this policy could also look at how the revenue raised is used, since directing it transparently towards public health programmes tends to increase public support for the tax in the first place, rather than it being seen simply as an additional financial burden on consumers.

Many food and drink products contain a lot of sugar, which can cause health problems. I agree that making these products more expensive would help people eat less sugar.

There is evidence that higher prices change people's behaviour. For example, Mexico added a tax on sugary drinks, and after this, people bought fewer sugary drinks than before. This shows that price increases can really work.

Also, the money from these taxes can be used by the government for other health programmes, such as teaching people about healthy eating.

However, I do not think higher prices solve the whole problem. Some people will keep buying sugary products even if they cost more, so this method does not work for everyone. I think education about healthy eating is also needed.

In conclusion, I agree that sugary products should be more expensive because this can reduce how much sugar people eat, but I think price increases should be combined with education about health. Countries could also use some of the tax revenue to fund public health campaigns, which would help people understand exactly why reducing sugar in their diet matters, rather than only relying on higher prices to change behaviour on their own. Without this kind of additional support, some people may simply continue their existing habits regardless of the extra cost involved, meaning the health benefits of the tax alone would likely be smaller than if it were combined with clear public information about the risks of excessive sugar consumption, particularly for children and teenagers who are still forming their long-term eating habits.

Many food and drink product contain lot of sugar, which can cause health problem. I agree that making this product more expensive would help people eat less sugar.

There is evidence that higher price change people behaviour. For example, Mexico add tax on sugary drink, and after this, people buy fewer sugary drink than before. This show that price increase can really work.

Also, the money from this tax can be use by government for other health programme, such as teaching people about healthy eating.

However, I do not think higher price solve the whole problem. Some people will keep buying sugary product even if it cost more, so this method does not work for everyone. I think education about healthy eating is also need.

In conclusion, I agree that sugary product should be more expensive because this can reduce how much sugar people eat, but I think price increase should be combine with education about health. Country could also use some of the tax revenue to fund public health campaign, which would help people understand exactly why reducing sugar in their diet matter, rather than only relying on higher price to change behaviour on their own. Without this kind of additional support, some people may simply continue their existing habit regardless of the extra cost involved, meaning the health benefit of the tax alone would likely be smaller than if it were combine with clear public information about the risk of excessive sugar consumption, particularly for children and teenager who is still forming their long-term eating habit.