Humans have been battling the tropical disease malaria since at least the late fourth century B.C. This debilitating and deadly disease is actually a parasite which reproduces in humans and is spread through the saliva of mosquitoes when they suck blood from humans. While there is still no cure for malaria, there are three main strategies that we hope will lead to the eradication of this disease which kills nearly half a million people around the world each year.
The first strategy is to fight the malaria parasite itself by treating patients with powerful prescription medicines. Patients are tested to determine which strain of the malaria parasite is present, as different areas of the world have different strains of the parasite. Then, an effective medicine is administered to combat the symptoms of the infection.
The second strategy is to kill the mosquitoes that transfer the parasite to humans. Killing the adult mosquitoes using chemical sprays is a common option, but the larvae of the mosquitoes can also be killed where they develop, in pools of warm, still water. These larvae can be killed using chemicals, but another popular approach is to release fish into the water that prey on the larvae such as guppies to eat the larvae before they mature into adults.
The third strategy is called the sterile insect technique. "Sterile" means the insect cannot reproduce. This strategy involves breeding and hatching millions of mosquitoes, sterilizing the males with low-level gamma rays, and then releasing them into the wild population. Females that mate with the sterile males produce eggs which do not hatch, and this causes the mosquitoes to die out. This strategy has been effective in wiping out a number of insect pests including the screw-worm and several types of fruit flies
The reading and the article are both about three srategies to eradicate the lethal disease Malaria.
While the author of the article argues that those three srategies are effective in getting rid of that disease, the lecturer disputes the claims mentioned n the article. His position is that they are not going to eradicate it completely.
To begin with, accordingto the reading attacking the parasite that cause Malaria by powerfull prescribed medications is an effective way to eradicate it. The article mentions that using the right medication for the right strain after testing is very effective. The argument is challanged by the lecturer. He claims that due to the adaptation of parasites, they become immune to many medications. Additionally, he points out that eventually all medications will be useless and no longer effective, that is what happened with the chloroquine.
Secondly, the author suggests killing the mosquito that carry the parasite by using either spraying chemicals or chemicals in the pool of water. The article notes that despite of being an easy way, it is not effective. The lecturer, however, asserts that reaching enough mosquitoes is very unlikely. He goes to say that it is not a great idea to get rid of Malaria.
Finally, the author puts forth the idea that using the sterile insect technique is the most effective method of all strategies. The author contends that gamma rays have been proved to be effective with sterlizing fruit flies, so why not male mosquitoes. In contrast, the lecturer's stance is that even though it seems to be an unharmful strategy, but it is not effective such in the flies. He says that gamma rays damage the ability to mate in male mosquitoes, so they are not going to mate effectively. Consequently, they are not going to produce unhatched eggs.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 271, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lecturers'' or 'lecturer's'?
Suggestion: lecturers'; lecturer's
...y not male mosquitoes. In contrast, the lecturers stance is that even though it seems to ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, however, second, secondly, so, while, in contrast, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1515.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 301.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03322259136 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7654649486 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53488372093 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 484.2 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.0912913994 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.1176470588 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7058823529 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.41176470588 7.06452816374 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.0737953600461 0.272083759551 27% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0239940007865 0.0996497079465 24% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0241496942933 0.0662205650399 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0463132228773 0.162205337803 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0243783235496 0.0443174109184 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.