AIDS is a disease that has killed millions of people all over the world. Most of the cases of AIDS in the world are in poorer countries where the people can’t afford to buy the drugs that would help keep them alive and healthy. Many AIDS Advocacy Groups (AAGs) are trying to help the people in these developing countries get the health care they need to fight AIDS. AAGs are doing this in several ways.
First of all, they argue that the profits of these companies are too high and such high pricing is immoral in the face of such a devastating disease. AAGs believe that major drug companies should sell their AIDS medicines at a much lower cost so that AIDS patients who have very little money would not have to choose between buying their food or their medication.
Second, AAGs are trying to get governments to pay for AIDS drugs instead of individual people. In general, when buying in large quantities, the price goes down. Therefore, if a government bought enough medication for all the AIDS patients in its country, then the price per bottle of medication would be much lower than the price individuals currently pay when buying medication on their own.
Third, AAGs are beginning to encourage poor countries to make their own cheap versions of AIDS drugs, even though it is illegal to do so. If the drugs were made in the same country, this would not only reduce shipping costs, but it would also give many people jobs in these poorer countries.
The text proposes the idea about enabling a cheap AIDS drug in low-income countries, whereas the professor suggests the otherwise. Furthermore, the lecture contradicts the passage with three cogent arguments.
Firstly, the text advice to cut profit for the drug company is ineluctable. The lecturer says that the profit is very fundamental in a business because it is important for the survival of the company. Although the text believes it is unethical to take advantages from under resource people, the profit itself will benefit the population in the long term. The lecture points out that the profit will bring a new investment, hence more income. Consequently, more funds mean more drugs.
Secondly, even though the text maintains that the government, who should provide the drugs for the entire country, will get cheaper drugs because they buy in large quantities, the professor claims that statement not feasible. The lecture states that the poor government simply has no money to do so.
Finally, the encouragement to produce a cheaper version of the drugs locally is implausible because it considers illegal. Additionally, the lower price may happen not only because reduce shipping cost, like stated in the passage, but also because of the use of a tinted material. Even though, the text states that the recreation of the drug will open new job opportunities, the lack of quality control may cause harmful effect to the patient albeit dangerous.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, may, second, secondly, so, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 7.30242825607 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1232.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 235.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24255319149 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91531732006 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7669261806 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.604255319149 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 378.0 419.366225166 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.4652658326 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.666666667 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5833333333 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.06452816374 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0507971415494 0.272083759551 19% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0172480253527 0.0996497079465 17% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0265473148616 0.0662205650399 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0355459692652 0.162205337803 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0238854274575 0.0443174109184 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.