The consumption of sugary drinks has increased worldwide during the last few decades and is convincingly associated with the risk of obesity, which in turn is recognized as a strong risk factor for many cancers. But research on sugary drinks and the risk of cancer is still limited.
Recently, the phenomenon of eating sugary food and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of overweight risks is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that decreasing cancer can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, the risk of obesity can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of drinking sugary beverage, as well as cancer cases, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered fat disadvantages. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both laboratory experiment and suffering from cancer apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, risks of cancer might increase the consequences of eating too much sugar. Moreover, fundamental aspects of profound research could relate to this reality that the demerits of getting cancer pertain to junk food. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of chocolate and candy is correlated negatively with overeating. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of losing weight.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of academic research far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of obesity side effects prove the significance of limiting sugary drink, but also pinpoint healing cancer implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 31.9359605911 106% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.75862068966 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1429.0 1207.87684729 118% => OK
No of words: 258.0 242.827586207 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53875968992 5.00649968141 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12186866131 2.71678728327 115% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 139.433497537 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.651162790698 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 458.1 379.143842365 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.9378763766 50.4703680194 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.083333333 104.977214359 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 20.9669160288 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 6.9802955665 29% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 2.75862068966 326% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 2.91625615764 34% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.174741901228 0.242375264174 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0524086291345 0.0925447433944 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0531242103213 0.071462118173 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0952556794129 0.151781067708 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0171028442514 0.0609392437508 28% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 12.6369458128 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 53.1260098522 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.9458128079 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.85 11.5310837438 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.43 8.32886699507 125% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 55.0591133005 171% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.94827586207 146% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.