Some people claim that it is acceptable to use animals in medical research for the benefit of human beings, while other people argue that it is wrong. Discuss both views and give your opinion
It is controversial that testing on animals in medical studies should be accepted granted that it brings beneficial effects on human beings. By contrast, others reckon that it should not be taken on. In my opinion, I agree with the latter view, and this essay will debate both views.
It is understandable why experimenting on animals is beneficial, and the major striking feature is that it can diminish the potential risk of new remedies. Now that some animals have similar genetic structures to humans, scientists can anticipate the bodies' reactions. For example, a multitude of primates and mammals are used for experiments. From that, scientists may make proper adjustments, prior to applying on humans. Furthermore, such issues can curb drug-related dead. For instance, scientists used primates to test the way of blood transformation. Thanks to it, they may widen their knowledge about human blood transformation. As a result, tens of people might avoid the death of maladies admit pandemic.
Admittedly, by comment consent, animals testing is too unethical to accept. The most remarkable reason is that humans have no moral rights to experiment on animals even kill after using. What is more, this places a burden on the government's budget. Because scientists can feed, house, and take care of those animals with a view to serving for testing. On top of that, testing on animals cannot deter people from side-effects, which brings detrimental effects on people's health. Last but not least, such issue will be deemed to abuse unnecessarily. For example, the cosmetic industry may not test before using.
To sum up, it seems to me although experimenting on animals exerts favourable effects on individuals' stature, this is unethical. Scientists should mitigate this issue.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 90, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
...on animals exerts favourable effects on individuals stature, this is unethical. Scientists ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, may, so, for example, for instance, as a result, in my opinion, to sum up, what is more, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1500.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 284.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.28169014085 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96442907055 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 176.041082164 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.619718309859 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 454.5 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 20.2975951904 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.5820208619 49.4020404114 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 75.0 106.682146367 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.2 20.7667163134 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05 7.06120827912 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
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: 0.23217478562 0.244688304435 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0587234027737 0.084324248473 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0445336950628 0.0667982634062 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128425864035 0.151304729494 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0674538402546 0.056905535591 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.0946893788 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 50.2224549098 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.3001002004 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.75 12.4159519038 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 78.4519038076 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.1190380762 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.