In the modern world, people are no longer necessary to use food from animals or product from animals such as medicine and clothing. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Owing to the problem which a growing extinction of animal people causes for nature, some people believe that it is unnecessary to consume goods which are made from animals. Personally, I completely agree that this is the best way to curb the loss of the Earth’s creatures.
Firstly, diminishing the use of animal products cuts down a huge pressure on the water resource. Each year, thousands of tons of clear water need to be used in the animal husbandry for feeding and washing purposes, while there are lots of nations suffering from drought. In comparison with the water demand of these communities, the farming industry would be a serious waste. For instance, the chicken farms consume a huge amount of water to feed all the chicks, however, they will soon wipe out all these chicks but the hens due to their fertility. Finally, the dead chicks are useless but consume a lot of water.
Another point to consider is that some regions believe using the rare animal body’s part could treat fatal illness, which leads to illegal hunting. Whereas the scientists have proved that these things do not have any special advantages, the rumor still outweighs the science. Take rhinoceros for example. The Chinese said that rhino’s horn, which is made from keratin, could treat cancer, so the victim tried to buy that “fairy medicine” at all costs. But they did not realize that keratine is a normal chemical, which our hair and nails are made of. Consequently, the rhinos die out in China, and the victims are still not able to recover from illness.
In conclusion, nowadays, using animal products is unnecessary in people’s daily life, if not waste.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 274, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: comparison,
...s of nations suffering from drought. In comparison with the water demand of these communit...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 101, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y in people’s daily life, if not waste.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, firstly, however, if, so, still, whereas, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1382.0 1615.20841683 86% => OK
No of words: 280.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.93571428571 5.12529762239 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09062348924 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50398661729 2.80592935109 89% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 176.041082164 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.610714285714 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 422.1 506.74238477 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 41.4760811327 49.4020404114 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.7142857143 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 20.7667163134 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.85714285714 7.06120827912 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.191955203283 0.244688304435 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0612467784648 0.084324248473 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0618150617439 0.0667982634062 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129955937103 0.151304729494 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0381310805518 0.056905535591 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.0946893788 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 50.2224549098 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.4159519038 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 78.4519038076 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => 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.