Food can be produced much more cheaply today because of improved fertilisers and better machinery. However, some of the methods used to do this may be dangerous to human health and may have negative effects on local communities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Food is one of the most important ingredients that give energy to people, which might be produced naturally without fertilizers and machinery or with. Even though the quantity of food might be increased, unfortunately, the quality of it might be affected. This essay will describe the possibility of cheap production of food and the drawbacks of such production.
One of the most conspicuous trends in the twenty-first century is that modern food can be produced with the help of superior machinery. Additionally, scientists created new fertilizers that certainly made the growing process faster. These unnatural innovations dramatically improved production processes. The price of food has decreased and as a result, people can buy more food for the same amount of money.
On the other hand, these advantages do not overweight drawbacks because people’s health has significantly being suffered from these new technological innovations and, especially, fertilizes. For instance, according to the recent statistic, the more people use fertilizes to grow the food, the more individuals suffer cancer. Furthermore, many babies were born with disabilities that might be due to the diet of their parents, particularly, the quality of food.
To sum up, there is no doubt that there is a possibility of food production by using upgraded machines and new fertilizes. However, the quality of food dramatically decreases when people use these new modern improvements. I believe that the fast production of food cannot make people benefit from it. Moreover, these may bring only disadvantages for people, for example, more individuals suffering from cancer.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, for example, for instance, no doubt, as a result, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1404.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK
No of words: 254.0 315.596192385 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.52755905512 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.20363070211 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14317256273 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 176.041082164 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.586614173228 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 435.6 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.0350135811 49.4020404114 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.285714286 106.682146367 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1428571429 20.7667163134 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06120827912 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.199331594794 0.244688304435 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0675136665281 0.084324248473 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0345970760226 0.0667982634062 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125558291918 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.025708222282 0.056905535591 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.0946893788 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.5 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 78.4519038076 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.