I disagree with the argument that food in the past was healthier than nowadays. There are three reasons why.
First of all, the lower food processing technique in the past can not extract enough nutrients for people. According to research published by the University of Cambridge in 2017, it indicated that the average number of nutrients which are processed by contemporary machines is over 35% more than in the past century; otherwise, the amount of the nutrient component is over 27% as well. Moreover, other research at the University of Harvard in late 2017 provided evidence to prove that increasing health indexes to people is the consequence of the development of the food industry. The newest technology provides an effective method to extract as many nutrients from food, such as breaking the cell layer to extract the valuable components inside.
In addition, the food variability nowadays is sufficient to support people’s health than old times did. Due to the rapid agricultural development and convenient transport system contemporary, people have many choices for food. As a result, the multiple and plentiful recipes supply sufficient needed substances to people, which is beneficial to each, especially for children and elders. For example, the people living in Spain could buy Chinese fruits in the local market, it is helpful for people to absorb multiple nutrients instantly to avoid some disease.
Furthermore, the unfortunate political situation around the world in the past led most people to suffer in the war; therefore, the lack of food made people have no choice but to reduce the health standard for food because if not they will starve and wait for death. In World War I and World War II, most people living in the slum, most times, the only food for them is dilute milk, coarse flour and other poor food, and these foods cannot support vital needed energy and nutrients for people. A survey which analysed the influence of low-quality food supply during World War I and World II published by the University of Calgary indicated the reducing population is due to the inadequate food supply because of the malnutrition killing people gradually.
To sum up, the food supply nowadays is more nutritious, variable, and abundant than old times, and it is favourable to people's health as well.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nowadays. There are three reasons why. First of all, the lower food processing ...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...xtract the valuable components inside. In addition, the food variability nowada...
^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ients instantly to avoid some disease. Furthermore, the unfortunate political s...
^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...malnutrition killing people gradually. To sum up, the food supply nowadays is m...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, if, moreover, so, therefore, well, for example, in addition, such as, as a result, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 15.1003584229 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 9.8082437276 41% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 13.8261648746 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 43.0788530466 28% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 52.1666666667 105% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1955.0 1977.66487455 99% => OK
No of words: 381.0 407.700716846 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1312335958 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73468646615 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 212.727598566 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.527559055118 0.524837075471 101% => OK
syllable_count: 596.7 618.680645161 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 11.0 3.08781362007 356% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.6003584229 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 20.1344086022 134% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 71.5698602623 48.9658058833 146% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.642857143 100.406767564 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.2142857143 20.6045352989 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.35714285714 5.45110844103 172% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.5376344086 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.226439275644 0.236089414692 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0913916774241 0.076458572812 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0584031651635 0.0737576698707 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145574515968 0.150856017488 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0534486830218 0.0645574589148 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 11.7677419355 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 58.1214874552 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.1575268817 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 10.9000537634 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.01818996416 115% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 86.8835125448 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.0537634409 127% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.