Governments should spend more money on medical research to protect citizens' health rather than on protecting the environment. Do you agree or disagree?
Opinions are divided on whether government should allocate financial resources to improve healthcare industry or to preserve the environment. I believe that both factors should be equally allotted to as each one has a significant impact on the existence of humankind.
Granted, there are compelling reasons to say that investing in medical studies to ensure the health of citizens is the appropriate course of action. Chief of these is that humans’ health has been posed to many threats regarding chronic diseases or severe pandemics. COVID-19, say, is a worldwide epidemic which not only is responsible for the staggering fatality rate but also causes economic downturns in a host of countries. Hence, urgent inventions of COVID-19 vaccine and medicines must be executed, which is in dire need of a huge amount of money from the government. Another justification to financially supply to the health-care system is to enhancing the social welfare, allowing individuals to have a greater longevity and lead a healthy lifestyle. Thus, only by conducting such medical financial investments could the stabilities of societies be ensured.
Despite the importance of funding medical researches, allotting financial resources to conserve the environment is of paramount essence to human race. The key argument here is that role of natural elements such as air, soil and water have an integral impact on humans’ health. For instance, the dire consequences of air pollution from factories would result immediately in individuals’ health, which could cause diseases like pneumonia or asthma. Therefore, it is vital that resources should be allocated to install high-tech air purifying systems or manufacture more hybrid vehicles. In addition, ecology including wildlife and plant habitats helps boost the nature sustainability, hence, the conservation of fauna and flora needs to receive financial support from the government particularly in those areas where landfill sites are significantly contaminating, which comes at the expense of biodiversity. This, according to this theory, might have a stultifying effect on citizens’ well-being.
In conclusion, while there are justifications to prove that giving money to medical studies is a prudent investment, I believe the environment preservation should receive the same funding and attention from the government.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, regarding, so, therefore, thus, well, while, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 41.998997996 124% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2016.0 1615.20841683 125% => OK
No of words: 356.0 315.596192385 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.66292134831 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34372677135 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16984394211 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 176.041082164 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.620786516854 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 639.0 506.74238477 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.8599005652 49.4020404114 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.4 106.682146367 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7333333333 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.73333333333 7.06120827912 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => 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: 0.138746944371 0.244688304435 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0445740505909 0.084324248473 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0300827576961 0.0667982634062 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.087086981086 0.151304729494 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.015939706696 0.056905535591 28% => 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: 17.1 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.84 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.77 8.58950901804 125% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 78.4519038076 172% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.