There is an undeniable fact that the significant amount of food and drink products that are manufactured comprise enourmous rates of sugar, as result of which there are many health illnesses. Thus, products that include sugar should be unaffordable to buy and to induce individuals to eat less sugar. I believe that it is not an effective solution to the alarming dillema.
First of all, It is true that making sugary products more expansive might have a positive effect on people's life as long as people start to buy healthy products that are inexpensive. As a consequence, this might help to reduce the consumption of that kind of products. Furthermore, it must be said that this step would support the actions of reducing illnesses caused by sugar commodities, making individuals more healthy and look like less fatter. For example, if that kind of restrictions were made, it will enhance the overall well-being of those who consume sugar.
On the other hand, it seems to me that this idea suffers a lot due to the fact considerabe amount of absorbers may continue to erode that kind of sugar products, if we take only this step ignoring other supplementary measures such as encouraging nutritional foods by making them more affordable and cheaper. Hence, these steps would greatly enhance the healthiness of consumers. For instance, in England, government increased the cost of that type of products by 50% but it had not match the expectations established by them. These painful lessons seem to demonstrate that doubling the fee of that goods is not adequate.
In conclusion, it appears to me that the concept is not sufficiently positive and I believe that further supportive measures in addition to this is surely needed.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 437, Rule ID: LESS_COMPARATIVE[1]
Message: Non-standard use of the comparative or superlative. Did you mean 'less fat'?
Suggestion: less fat
... individuals more healthy and look like less fatter. For example, if that kind of restricti...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 483, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'matched'.
Suggestion: matched
... type of products by 50% but it had not match the expectations established by them. T...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, hence, if, look, may, so, thus, well, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, kind of, such as, first of all, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 18.0 7.30460921844 246% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 38.0 24.0651302605 158% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1452.0 1615.20841683 90% => OK
No of words: 288.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04166666667 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87348155016 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.576388888889 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 451.8 506.74238477 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.8496123521 49.4020404114 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.0 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.9166666667 7.06120827912 211% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => 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: 0.287891971427 0.244688304435 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0876470521229 0.084324248473 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0963824767596 0.0667982634062 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152731381071 0.151304729494 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.126584764959 0.056905535591 222% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.4159519038 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 78.4519038076 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 437, Rule ID: LESS_COMPARATIVE[1]
Message: Non-standard use of the comparative or superlative. Did you mean 'less fat'?
Suggestion: less fat
... individuals more healthy and look like less fatter. For example, if that kind of restricti...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 483, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'matched'.
Suggestion: matched
... type of products by 50% but it had not match the expectations established by them. T...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, hence, if, look, may, so, thus, well, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, kind of, such as, first of all, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 18.0 7.30460921844 246% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 38.0 24.0651302605 158% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1452.0 1615.20841683 90% => OK
No of words: 288.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04166666667 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87348155016 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.576388888889 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 451.8 506.74238477 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.8496123521 49.4020404114 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.0 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.9166666667 7.06120827912 211% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => 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: 0.287891971427 0.244688304435 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0876470521229 0.084324248473 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0963824767596 0.0667982634062 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152731381071 0.151304729494 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.126584764959 0.056905535591 222% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.4159519038 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 78.4519038076 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.