Some folks think that the finest way to upgrade public health is by escalating the quantity of sports facilities. But others say that this could have minor influence on public health, so other acts are necessary. This essay will discuss both sides and reach a logical conclusion.
The reduction of a considerable amount of stress is one of the major benefits of laying heavy emphasis in sports facilities. Since exercises produce endorphins, which perform as a natural painkiller, the stress levels dwindle substantially owing to the influence of the chemical. Understandably, stress is truly liable for the poor human health in society. Next, the life expectancy of people tends to expand when there are soared sports complexes. Indoor swimming would be a good example. The continuous movement of limbs and body can burn the body fats that actually facilitate the lowering of blood pressure and cardiovascular disease, subjecting to a healthy doubled life span.
In spite of the mentioned benefits, this type of strategy (sports facilities), is primarily beneficial for the people who are wealthy as the fee of joining such facilities is usually pricey. Therefore by the implementation of the following two measures, public health can be promoted according to the critics of the sports facilities. Firstly, people ought to be provided free education about the safe contraception. Take sexually transmitted disease "AIDS", which is a common human health issue, for an instance. If people used condoms during engaging in unsafe sex, ruining health could be halted. Secondly, the government should levy high tax on unhealthy foods since they are the leading source of obesity, another routine public health concern. There is a high possibility that the owners will be alarmed to sell ill health foods because of the higher rate capitations.
To sum up, considering the potential failure of accommodating all class of people in the community with regard to the sports facilities, i believe the discussed two outlines are extremely worthwhile than the counterpart for the improvement of public health.
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 8.5 out of 9
Category: Excellent Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 333 350
No. of Characters: 1724 1500
No. of Different Words: 204 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.272 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.177 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.8 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 142 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 95 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 66 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.588 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.095 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.471 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.296 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.482 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.038 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 190, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ning such facilities is usually pricey. Therefore by the implementation of the following ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 884, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...because of the higher rate capitations. To sum up, considering the potential fai...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 138, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
...y with regard to the sports facilities, i believe the discussed two outlines are ...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, in spite of, to sum up, with regard to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 24.0651302605 37% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1782.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 333.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35135135135 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97834622264 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612612612613 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 550.8 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.2637707222 49.4020404114 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.823529412 106.682146367 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5882352941 20.7667163134 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.64705882353 7.06120827912 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => 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: 0.305998022172 0.244688304435 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0875048750556 0.084324248473 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0769053153501 0.0667982634062 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.194565157728 0.151304729494 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108803190583 0.056905535591 191% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.0946893788 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.4159519038 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.51 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.