To meet the growing needs of food for the increasing population, country should make use of edible insects as foods. However, some people believe that insects are not only unhealthy but affect negatively the nature too. What are the benefits and drawbacks of eating insects?
There has been a colossal upsurge in discussing whether or not using insect products to meet the global food demand for dealing with the overpopulation. This trend has its own pros and cons. Both sides of this debate will be analyzed in this essay before a reasonable and rational conclusion is reached.
On the one hand, starving and lacking of food to meet the global demand are becoming the alarming problem. Taking advantage of insect products not only help us tackle this popularizing issue but also diminish the constraint of food shortage. Firstly, making use of edible insects as foods can encourage people to create a variety of food and mitigate the starving matter. Secondly, people across the globe are not strictly dependent on the industrial poultry such as chickens, ducks, pigs,... Thirdly, there is anecdotal evidence that eating insects can bring harm to the consumer. Perhaps the best example of this trend would be Mexico and Thailand. Both nations have many foods made from insects which are consumed daily by resident and tourist. It is so evident that edible insects are not dangerous to human or even make the food culture become more diverse.
On the other hand, it is seem that some people veto this trend and assume that consuming insects can affect negatively the nature or even cause harm to our health. In some Western countries, turning insects into food are seen to be inhuman and abominable. Moreover, the process of produce dishes form insects require many skills and patient because some insects have their own poison and their hazardous appearance. Furthermore, nothing can tackle the overpopulation demand if we don't preserve it. People may become more and more inhuman if we eat all creatures living in the Earth. Undoubtedly, if the insects run out of the biodiversity, it can damage the nature and destroy its intrinsic balance. We are human and we need to have our selected choice of food to make sure that both nature and us are better-off.
To recapitulate, everything attaches with two points: one affirmative and one negative. It all come downs that consuming insects products or not is based on the perception and culture of person. It is seemed that the cutting-edge technology nowadays can create food with some chemical material in order to meet the food demand.
Turning to the remaining group, it is clear that Australia, USA, Russia, India, Spain and UK nearly have the similar pattern, which is the total people' willingness to eat insect is more than 30%. Finally, the Japanese come as the least nation of consuming insect products, which is merely 20%.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 49, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...s been a colossal upsurge in discussing whether or not using insect products to meet the globa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 489, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , .
...al poultry such as chickens, ducks, pigs,... Thirdly, there is anecdotal evidence ...
^^
Line 5, column 26, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'seemed'.
Suggestion: seemed
...re diverse. On the other hand, it is seem that some people veto this trend and as...
^^^^
Line 5, column 481, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... tackle the overpopulation demand if we dont preserve it. People may become more and...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 13.1623246493 160% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 10.4138276553 211% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 24.0651302605 137% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2182.0 1615.20841683 135% => OK
No of words: 437.0 315.596192385 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.99313501144 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57214883401 4.20363070211 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57792685987 2.80592935109 92% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 176.041082164 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526315789474 0.561755894193 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 688.5 506.74238477 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => 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: 23.0 16.0721442886 143% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.6589702159 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.8695652174 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 20.7667163134 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.73913043478 7.06120827912 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.9879759519 226% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.4128256513 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.318625855605 0.244688304435 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0881239344869 0.084324248473 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0724403414034 0.0667982634062 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.163186561338 0.151304729494 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0756746748815 0.056905535591 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.0946893788 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 78.4519038076 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.