The increase in food production owes much to fertilizers and better machinery, but some people think that it has a negative impact on human health and community. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is argued that whether modern means of increasing food production can be beneficial to human healthy and society. While a group of people indicate that these methods could carry out disadvantages and I partially agree with this perspective, I argue that the latest ways of producing food can positively impact people’s lives.
The innovative means of food production could negatively influence people’s health and the place where they live on. It is evident that a large amount of pesticide or fertilizers use has gradually damaged individual’s growth and environment. Indeed, these types of chemical materials discharge toxic materials, resulting in the deterioration of soil and the human immune system. For example, Taiwanese government states that the determination of agricultural chemicals has become a severe issue as famers unlimitedly utilise fertilizers and pesticide monthly in order to immediately harvest a larger quantity of vegetables or fruit. In other words, the earth and humans constantly absorb fatal chemicals.
However, the invocation of modern technology for meat production surely benefit people and the world. Firstly, food safety can be fully addressed by introducing new technological products, improving standards of individuals’ hygiene. For instance, food can last longer and keep fresh in fridges, reducing possibilities of food poison. In addition, working in food industry is less risky than before. This is due to the fact that individuals are well protected by advanced machines at work. Robotic arms are implemented to slaughter livestock animals, leading to the reduction of risk in workplace in Taiwan.
In conclusion, although the ways of food production can result in negative impact on human beings and society, I still believe that they indeed bring a variety of advantages to people’s lives.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...positively impact people's lives. The innovative means of food production ...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ns constantly absorb fatal chemicals. However, the invocation of modern techno...
^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uction of risk in workplace in Taiwan. In conclusion, although the ways of food...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, so, still, well, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1592.0 1615.20841683 99% => OK
No of words: 282.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.64539007092 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20787754538 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.641843971631 0.561755894193 114% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => 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: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.606160887 49.4020404114 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.714285714 106.682146367 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.1428571429 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.42857142857 7.06120827912 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.202443039355 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0638513364845 0.084324248473 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0541606054738 0.0667982634062 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130136476025 0.151304729494 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0367233295974 0.056905535591 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.0946893788 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 50.2224549098 68% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.49 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.51 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 78.4519038076 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.