Nowadays, more and more people are concerned about animal rights. Whether humans can make use of animals for our own benefits has recently caused a heated debate. In my view, it is acceptable to use animals for reasonable purposes and it is impossible to prohibit all the animal products or animal testing.
Firstly, just as big fish eat smaller ones, human beings, as the top creature in the food chain of this planet, inevitably rely on other animals. This corresponds with the natural law. Although now we have many advanced technologies that may sustain us without animal protein or clothes made of fur and leather, we cannot just turn around and accuse the natural lifestyle of human beings which always allows us to make use of animals if necessary.
Moreover, there are certain animal products that play a role so important in human society that once we have to cut them down, our life will suffer unimaginable changes. For example, if humans are not allowed to use animals, we would not be able to find single soap in the market, because it’s made of animals’ fat. Another example could be pigs’ heart valve, which is now widely use in human heart surgeries. Without pigs’ heart valves as human’s substitution, thousands of people would suffer heart diseases that could have been cured. Certain animal products are indispensable if we take human interests and happiness into consideration.
That is not to say that we could treat animals as we want. We should all condemn those people who hunt wild endangered animals just for fun, or abuse animals forcing them to complete performance in circus, because what they have done will not only hurt animals but also hurt other people’s feelings, as a huge amount of us do hold a humble view that although we humans seem to be smarter than animals, we still form a part of the nature, just like all other animals do, which means we’re even in a sense.
In summary, people could and should make use of animals, but only in necessary ways. Meanwhile, we should also pay closer attention to animal protection and animal rights, make sure no one dare to disobey animal protection laws, to abuse or even slaughter them in an unacceptable way. Only by doing so can we make this planet a better place both for animals and human beings.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 262, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an unacceptable way" with adverb for "unacceptable"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...n laws, to abuse or even slaughter them in an unacceptable way. Only by doing so can we make this plan...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, may, moreover, so, still, while, for example, in summary, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 7.85571142285 191% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 24.0651302605 154% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1932.0 1615.20841683 120% => OK
No of words: 396.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87878787879 5.12529762239 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46091344257 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57986402706 2.80592935109 92% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 176.041082164 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550505050505 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 622.8 506.74238477 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 5.43587174349 166% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 97.4794850212 49.4020404114 197% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.75 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.75 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.1875 7.06120827912 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.286133539763 0.244688304435 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109209925942 0.084324248473 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0716418442891 0.0667982634062 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.19030275439 0.151304729494 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0906887438469 0.056905535591 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.0946893788 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.4159519038 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.58950901804 97% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.