One of the most important issues facing the world today is a shortage of food and some think genetically modified foods are a possible solution.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Many people are starving all over the world due to food scarcity, and some are suggesting that one way of combatting this global phenomenon is through modifying the genetics of food. While scientifically enhancing food elements might be an effective way to expand food resources, I disagree that it would do much in terms of curbing worldwide hunger because this scientific innovation will most likely only benefit countries with financial capabilities and ultimately still leave the poorest of the poor lacking food.
Modifying the DNA structure of food offers endless possibilities to humans. Unbeknownst to some people, this innovation is not new and has been used for a long time to grow fruits without seeds as an example. If we move forward with this innovation, we can increase the number of plants we grow, or decrease the harvesting time needed for fruits to ripen. As a result, there would be more food for people to consume.
However, despite its potential, the cost is one reason why this practice is not implemented worldwide. Genetically modifying food is an expensive process so countries that are already struggling financially to feed their citizens, will not be able to afford this kind of technology. Poverty-stricken societies, mostly living in third-world countries with little to no access to sophisticated innovations, will remain hungry, thereby, not solving this global dilemma. A similar example is vertical farming. This agricultural innovation allows fruits and vegetables to be grown in tall buildings, but despite its tangible benefits to the environment, most countries fail to adopt this technology due to budget. The same can be said in terms of food genetics.
In conclusion, although the modification of food genetics can increase food resources, this does not mean that the benefit will extend to poor countries, and the poor with no budget to keep up with this technology will continue to starve. Therefore, governments all over the world should get involved and look into a more practical way of dealing with famine.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, look, so, still, therefore, third, while, in conclusion, kind of, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1733.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 331.0 315.596192385 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23564954683 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95527582876 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577039274924 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 527.4 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 79.0142069375 49.4020404114 160% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.785714286 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6428571429 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.78571428571 7.06120827912 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.67935871743 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.203786672913 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0763499408784 0.084324248473 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0683039314475 0.0667982634062 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.134093628742 0.151304729494 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0689025572062 0.056905535591 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.0946893788 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.4 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 78.4519038076 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.