Medical technology is responsible for the human's life expectancy. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of the technology of medicine and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of the medical knowledge is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructed and positive by the substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that a healthy lifestyle can be a plus, I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the social standpoint, human lifestyle can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of the professional life, as well as the natural life, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered life experiences. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both the mental health and the physical health apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, life technology might increase the consequences of technological development. Moreover, fundamental aspects of technological information could relate to this reality that the demerits of chronic diseases pertain to painful illnesses. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of the medical technology is correlated negatively with the health centre. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of technological growth.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of life expectancy far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of the human cycle prove the significance of medical centres, but also pinpoint technological sciences implication.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 280, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'sciences'' or 'science's'?
Suggestion: sciences'; science's
...entres, but also pinpoint technological sciences implication.
^^^^^^^^
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 : 4.0 8.36945812808 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 31.9359605911 100% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1466.0 1207.87684729 121% => OK
No of words: 258.0 242.827586207 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.68217054264 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 3.92707691288 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.28173513094 2.71678728327 121% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 139.433497537 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.635658914729 0.580463131201 110% => OK
syllable_count: 472.5 379.143842365 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
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: 41.2674205639 50.4703680194 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.166666667 104.977214359 116% => 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: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.17521751426 0.242375264174 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0582865685355 0.0925447433944 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0486415155641 0.071462118173 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0984289615548 0.151781067708 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0410872115356 0.0609392437508 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 12.6369458128 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.24 53.1260098522 63% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.9458128079 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.66 11.5310837438 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.55 8.32886699507 127% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 55.0591133005 174% => 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: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 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.