Some people think that genetically modified (GM) crops are a positive development. Others, however, argue that they are potentially dangerous. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Nowadays, as more and more technologies are able to change genetic components of plants, people begin worrying whether its cons have outweighed its pros. Some argue that such innovations are detrimental, while others believe that they are immensely beneficial. From my point of view, I agree with the statement that GM technologies are dangerous.
On the one hand, it is clear that there are various applications and advantages produced by GM crops. One of those utilisations would be the unprecedented increase in pests resistant. This means that insects are not likely to attack and cause harm onto fields and thus could aid to maintain a high level of farming productivity. Another gain would be the noticeable rise in plants quality and uniquenesses. Modified watermelon, for example, would be greatly tastier and significantly larger than the normal one. As a result, not only people could buy extraordinary fruits, but the harvesters would also earn a considerable amount of profit.
On the other hand, despite all the mentioned positivities, GM plants still hold many unknown aspects. The safety of these crops, for instance, is not proven completely by biologists. There are cases in which people who over-consume GM products would eventually get long-term effects such as sickness or food abstention. Furthermore, there are not enough research papers or mass evidence indicating the harmlessness of such supplies. Meanwhile, several reports have illustrated that by sowing these crops in a wide extent, the respective habit, including soil and minerals, would consequently drop. In other words, many questionable phenomena from these new resources are yet to be denied.
To conclude, whereas altered seeds provide numerous positive impacts, it is necessary to carry more scrutinies revolving their influences on human beings.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 690, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ese new resources are yet to be denied. To conclude, whereas altered seeds provi...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, if, so, still, thus, whereas, while, for example, for instance, such as, as a result, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 41.998997996 71% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1559.0 1615.20841683 97% => OK
No of words: 285.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4701754386 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01794366996 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.677192982456 0.561755894193 121% => OK
syllable_count: 480.6 506.74238477 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.2112566186 49.4020404114 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 97.4375 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8125 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.8125 7.06120827912 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
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: 0.150606374672 0.244688304435 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0411145487416 0.084324248473 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0359916848263 0.0667982634062 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0778820082462 0.151304729494 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0495848145851 0.056905535591 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.0946893788 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 50.2224549098 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.15 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.52 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 78.4519038076 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.