The increase in food production is mostly due to fertilizers and better machinery. Yet, some think that it harms human health and communities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It goes without saying that the proliferation of food products is mostly attributable to chemical substances and advanced machines. However, a number of people still regard them as detrimental to individuals’ well-being and society as a whole. In my opinion, the use of chemical substances and machinery shouldn’t be considered harmful by any means and, in turn, should be applied further to augment production.
Fertilizers and better machinery are an integral part of the world’s food production process. To elaborate, they provide the means necessary for agricultural products to increase rapidly in numbers, generating enough food to feed the whole population. Without them, there wouldn’t be an adequate replacement that yields enough food products to satisfy the ever-increasing rate of consumption. Africans would be a great case in point. Rather than incorporating chemical substances and autonomous machines into agriculture, they relied heavily on traditional farming practices to produce most of the food. As a result, they failed to cater to the needs of their population, which led to mass starvation.
Not only do they facilitate food production, but they have also significantly improved the community in other aspects. More precisely, fewer farmers are needed to grow and gather crops. This has encouraged the workforce to focus on other fields such as science and technology. Particularly, modern science has thrived on the premise that farm work could be done on a larger scale without requiring much manpower. Likewise, farming used to be a demanding and potentially hazardous job with little benefit to the practitioner. However, with the aid of fertilizers and modern machinery, farmers can now sit idly more than ever before. For example, there are milk machines for cows so that milkers wouldn’t need to do it by hand.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that fertilizers and machinery should be seen in a good light.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-10-06 | MorganConsort | 84 | view |
| 2021-12-10 | minhminhvu7 | 84 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, likewise, so, still, well, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1654.0 1615.20841683 102% => OK
No of words: 305.0 315.596192385 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42295081967 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11823791365 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.622950819672 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 510.3 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.6627894121 49.4020404114 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.2941176471 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9411764706 20.7667163134 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.70588235294 7.06120827912 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.160310161732 0.244688304435 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0486682630557 0.084324248473 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0561976143651 0.0667982634062 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0935333552506 0.151304729494 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0398612809217 0.056905535591 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.0946893788 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 50.2224549098 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.86 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.14 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 78.4519038076 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.