ORGANIC FOOD
The passage and the audio discuss about if organic food or traditional food, which use chemicals are good for the environment and to the health of the human being. First, the passage told us the why organic food is healthier and then how the traditional way of growing food is bed for the environment. And then, the audio told us how chemicals used to grow food are not as bad as people think.
On the one hand, the passage says that people that prefer organic food, does it because it is healthier than the traditional one. This is because as it doesn´t has chemicals they do not ingest them. Even more, there is some people who grow their own organic food. In contrast with the passage, the audio tells us that there is no risk at eating this chemicals because in spite of the use of them, those are removed when you wash the food. For example, they get washed at least two times before being eaten. Also the chemicals they use isn’t harmful even in big dosis to the human being.
On the other hand the passage says that organic food has less risk causing pollution than the traditional systems. For example, the chemicals are very dangerous for the environment and ecosystems, this means water, animals and vegetation can be impact in a bad way by the use of them. Nevertheless, the audio says that this is true only if the use of chemicals by the farmers is managed in a bad way and for this there are hard laws that prevent this kind of situations. Even more, the chemicals used are specific for their target so they should not affect to the rest of the environment.
In conclusion, the passage told us the bad side of the use of chemicals and the audio argue defending them.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-12-02 | bijan54 | 90 | view |
| 2020-11-19 | Dharmik94 | 76 | view |
| 2020-11-14 | Winner_007 | 80 | view |
| 2020-11-13 | fmichela | 80 | view |
| 2020-11-13 | Winner_007 | 80 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 192, Rule ID: THE_HOW[1]
Message: Did you mean 'why'?
Suggestion: why
...human being. First, the passage told us the why organic food is healthier and then how ...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 272, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: contrast,
...ple who grow their own organic food. In contrast with the passage, the audio tells us th...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 350, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ells us that there is no risk at eating this chemicals because in spite of the use o...
^^^^
Line 2, column 512, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
... at least two times before being eaten. Also the chemicals they use isn't harmf...
^^^^
Line 4, column 253, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a bad way" with adverb for "bad"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...r, animals and vegetation can be impact in a bad way by the use of them. Nevertheless, the a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 388, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a bad way" with adverb for "bad"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... of chemicals by the farmers is managed in a bad way and for this there are hard laws that p...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, nevertheless, so, then, at least, for example, in conclusion, in contrast, kind of, in spite of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1392.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 308.0 270.72406181 114% => OK
Chars per words: 4.51948051948 5.08290768461 89% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40324666552 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.448051948052 0.540411800872 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 432.0 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.8778747924 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.4285714286 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.35714285714 7.06452816374 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.282498312215 0.272083759551 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131299201333 0.0996497079465 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.15142887424 0.0662205650399 229% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183656599359 0.162205337803 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.152167517339 0.0443174109184 343% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 53.8541721854 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.94 12.2367328918 73% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.03 8.42419426049 83% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 63.6247240618 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.