Medical technology is responsible
for the human's life expectancy. To
what extent do you agree or
disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of the humans' life expectancy and its corresponding impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of being responsible for the life expectancy is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both positive and constructive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the medical technology can be a plus, and I will examine that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, the life expectancy can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that real-life issues, as well as taking medications, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered the quality of life. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both common phenomenon and medical centers apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of science, medical issues might increase the cosequences of life changes. Moreover, unique aspects of the family life relate to this reality that the demerits of prescribing medications pertain to using antibiotics. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of family backgrounds is correlated negatively with visiting doctors. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of improving the quality of life.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of medical achievements far outweigh its drawbacks.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 33, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'humans'' or 'human's'?
Suggestion: humans'; human's
Recently, the phenomenon of the humans life expectancy and its corresponding i...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, 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 : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => 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: 30.0 31.9359605911 94% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.75862068966 52% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1336.0 1207.87684729 111% => OK
No of words: 239.0 242.827586207 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.589958159 5.00649968141 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93187294222 3.92707691288 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18518062379 2.71678728327 117% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 139.433497537 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.640167364017 0.580463131201 110% => OK
syllable_count: 434.7 379.143842365 115% => 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: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.5024630542 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.4558767388 50.4703680194 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.454545455 104.977214359 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7272727273 20.9669160288 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.25397266985 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => 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: 0.147602930189 0.242375264174 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0552535313793 0.0925447433944 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0283860983378 0.071462118173 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0809569730217 0.151781067708 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0282965910652 0.0609392437508 46% => 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: 15.8 12.6369458128 125% => 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: 15.14 11.5310837438 131% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.82 8.32886699507 130% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 55.0591133005 169% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.3980295567 100% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => 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.