The reading and the lecture discusses about the use of fluoride in preventative dentistry. The author of the reading feels that the use of fluoride supplements is beneficial. The lecturer challenges the claims made by the author. He is of the opinion that a more cautious approach should be taken while using fluoride supplements.
To begin with, the author argues that the children living in areas of naturally occurring fluoridated water had better dental health as compared to children living in areas with fluoridated water. The article mentions that fluoride supplements can be added to the water supply in order to improve the concentration of fluoride in water. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He states that recent studies on this matter concluded that there wasn't any significant difference in the dental health of students living in areas rich in fluoridated water and fluoride deficient regions. Moreover, the lecturer also mentions that adding fluoride supplements to the water supply without the public's consent can be hazardous. The public would be treated as guinea pigs if the fluoride supplements are adding without first taking their consent since, there are many studies proving that fluoride supplements can in fact have dangerous side effects.
Secondly, the writer mentions that the benefits in dental health of people exposed to fluoride-supplemented water were similar to those obtained by people living in areas exposed to naturally occurring fluoride water. The lecturer, however, rebuts this argument by stating that the people who were exposed to fluoride supplemented water obtained the dental health benefits due to several other reasons, which are not related to the use of fluoride. Furthermore, the lecturer is of the opinion that the people were not clearly informed about the addition of fluoride supplemented water and hence, they would be subject to a dangerous experiment without any consent.
Finally, the author posits that fluoride helps in repairing cavities and prevent decay, thereby, improving the dental health. In contrast, the lecturer states that, there were several hazardous consequences when the fluoride supplements were tested on animals and therefore, could lead to several unforeseen health problems for the people using fluoride supplements. The lecturer also mentions that fluoride supplements were derived from hazardous wastes and other harmful substances.
- Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through lar 50
- Laws should not be rigid or fixed Instead they should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances times and places 59
- Young people enjoy life more than older people do 70
- There is nothing that an uneducated person can teach an educated person 70
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 176, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... of fluoride supplements is beneficial. The lecturer challenges the claims made by ...
^^^
Line 3, column 458, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
...ies on this matter concluded that there wasnt any significant difference in the denta...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, in contrast, in fact, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 30.3222958057 171% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2076.0 1373.03311258 151% => OK
No of words: 374.0 270.72406181 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.55080213904 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3976220399 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82626771285 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.451871657754 0.540411800872 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 641.7 419.366225166 153% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.5634525494 49.2860985944 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.75 110.228320801 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.375 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0625 7.06452816374 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.259246319323 0.272083759551 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110605753338 0.0996497079465 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0553265380856 0.0662205650399 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.179848479754 0.162205337803 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0225850216523 0.0443174109184 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 13.3589403974 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.8541721854 74% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.21 12.2367328918 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 63.6247240618 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.