Medical technology is responsible for the human's life expectancy. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of utilizing the technological methodes for manufacturing the medicine in oeder to increase the lifespan and its corresponding impacs has sparked a heated debate. Although this advanced ways are beneficial as they are regarded be the substantail numbers of individuals both constructive and positive, others hold opponent views. I am inclined to believe that this issue can be plus as it could develop some brilliant aspects for its adherents.
From a social standpoint, increasing the lifetime by using medical technological methodes can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact of living for long time. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered these benefits. Firstly, the advanced manufactured medicines or methodes have high precision and accuracy and led to increase of the public health. Moreover, inhabitatnts deserve to enjoy the rest of their lives after retirement. Furthermore, these methods diminishing the outbreaks of some hazardous diseases including cardiovascular ones and declining their cost.
On the one hand, there is no doubt the idea of enhancing the period of life by the modern and technological medical features has some opponents. They asserted that this phenomenon encounter the societies with an aging world. It is crystal clear that elderly people need to care. According to aresearch undertaken by a prestigious world-renowned university, a considerable amount of time and money is allocated for aged citizens annually by governments. They argue that this budget can use in the societies' priorities including education, entertainment and business.
In conclusion, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the merits of modern medical techniqus and their impacts on increasing the life expectancy are far more outweigh their demerits.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, if, moreover, so, while, in conclusion, no doubt
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 8.36945812808 119% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 5.94088669951 135% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 20.9802955665 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 31.9359605911 100% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.75862068966 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1662.0 1207.87684729 138% => OK
No of words: 295.0 242.827586207 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63389830508 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18214640315 2.71678728327 117% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 139.433497537 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.627118644068 0.580463131201 108% => OK
syllable_count: 534.6 379.143842365 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.6157635468 152% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.71428571429 175% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 12.6551724138 111% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.3112253151 50.4703680194 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.714285714 104.977214359 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0714285714 20.9669160288 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 7.25397266985 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0956803717834 0.242375264174 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0292969002156 0.0925447433944 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0394947426177 0.071462118173 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0573678127368 0.151781067708 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00939408490639 0.0609392437508 15% => 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: 15.6 12.6369458128 123% => 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: 15.37 11.5310837438 133% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.3 8.32886699507 124% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 55.0591133005 191% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 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.