An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author suggests the government of Tagus should put serious effort into convincing its citizens, mostly its farmers, that the re-engineered millet seeds should replace the traditional millet seeds. This suggestion, however, fails to provide a number of key information. Till the following questions can be answered, this suggestion is weak as it is fails in the expatiation of its intention.
Firstly, is there certainty or "proof" that the farmers of Tagus would pay for millet seeds that cost more? Moreover, how much more would these farmers have to pay? The act of subsidizing the productions of vitamin A rich millet does not necessarily imply these farmers would be obligated to buy the new millet seeds. Seeds which cost more than the natural millet seeds. Also, it could be possible that farming these new millet seeds is a lot more expensive than farming natural millet seeds and the subsidization doesn't do enough to alleviate the costs. Thus, this is a key questions that needs answering before the government of Tagus should consider the authors suggestion.
Another question that is paramount to this recommendation is, would the people of Tagus truly adopt this new bio-engineered millet? Would they see the bio-engineering of food they are to consume orthodox? It is plausible to think that, yes, because millet is a staple food in Tagus its residents would easily accommodate the new type of millet, but, it is wrong to base a suggestion on a mere assumption. Therefore, there would need to be empirical information that supports the residents of Tagus would truly accommodate this food change. After this, the government can proselytize its citizens into the farming and consumption of this new millet.
Lastly, what are the cons of this millet with regards to human health? What else does this millet have in high concentration? It needs to be answered and proven the possible health defect the consumption of this new millet can result in. It also needs to be mentioned what else it has in high doses. This would give an idea of what the people of Tagus are about to ingest into their system. In answering this question there would be a sense of understanding which can increase the millet's consumption and would result in the defeciency of vitamn A being cobated.
The suggestion consits of obvious holes and lack of answers to key questions that would stregthen its recommendation. If these questions were to be answered eloquently, the government of Tagus can then initaite a campaign to support the farming of these millts and hope to combat the vitamin A defieciency in this region. Till these questions are answered the suggestion and its recommendation do not hold water.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 244, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...roductions of vitamin A rich millet does not necessarily imply these farmers woul...
^^
Line 5, column 526, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ural millet seeds and the subsidization doesnt do enough to alleviate the costs. Thus,...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 669, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...government of Tagus should consider the authors suggestion. Another question that ...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 482, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'millets'' or 'millet's'?
Suggestion: millets'; millet's
...of understanding which can increase the millets consumption and would result in the def...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, moreover, so, then, therefore, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 33.0505617978 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2282.0 2235.4752809 102% => OK
No of words: 449.0 442.535393258 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08240534521 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60321845022 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89636267094 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 215.323595506 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.449888641425 0.4932671777 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 682.2 704.065955056 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.0346047284 60.3974514979 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.2173913043 118.986275619 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5217391304 23.4991977007 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.60869565217 5.21951772744 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.330701885581 0.243740707755 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10878020425 0.0831039109588 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.068642818577 0.0758088955206 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.186023140149 0.150359130593 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0906046057585 0.0667264976115 136% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.1392134831 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.1639044944 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.99 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 100.480337079 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.