The graph below shows the acid level in mouth from consumption of sugar and honey. Eating sweet foods produces acid in the mouth, which can causes tooth decay.
The supplied linear chart exhibits that the acid level increased in the mouth by eating the sugar, honey and cane sugar whereas, it produces the acid which can cause tooth decay.
Overall, it can be incurred that that sugar cane inclined the acid level in the mouth more than as compared to the sugar and honey.
Primarily, it can be clearly apparent that the fruit sugar is create the acid level in mouth, after the five minutes, it accorded at approximately 4.5 pH level. Moreover, in the 20 minutes it stays at the normal pH level and the all sweet foods it go the uppercase of the normal level in the 40 minutes.
Similarly, it can be observed that the cane sugar produces the acid level more in the mouth as opposed to the honey. In first 5 minutes the pH level in mouth after eating the cane sugar and honey is 3.5 and 5.7 respectively. The acidity level improve 12 minutes after eat the honey whereas, the sugar cane takes the 30 minutes. Furthermore, the sugar cane create the more acid level in mouth which can cause the tooth decay.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-08-15 | mandeep bhui | 67 | view |
| 2018-08-15 | mandeep bhui | 67 | view |
- Blood sports have become a hot topic for debate in recent years. As society develops it is increasingly seen as an uncivilized activity and cruel to the helpless animals that are killed. Blood sports should be banned .To what extent to you agree at disagr 73
- Some companies have uniforms for their staff which must be worn at all times What are the advantages for a company of having a uniform Are there any benefits of having a uniform for the staff 89
- In some countries young people are encourage to work or travel for a year between finishing high school and starting university studies. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages for young people who decide to do this? 67
- Childern are facing more pressure nowadays from academic, social and Commercial perspectives. What are causes the of these pressures and what measures should be taken to reduce this problem. 67
- The two graphs show the main sources of energy in the U.S.A. in the 1980 and the 1990. 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, moreover, similarly, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 1.00243902439 499% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 12.0 5.60731707317 214% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 18.0 33.7804878049 53% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 865.0 965.302439024 90% => OK
No of words: 191.0 196.424390244 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.52879581152 4.92477711251 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.71756304063 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.2339277912 2.65546596893 84% => OK
Unique words: 80.0 106.607317073 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.418848167539 0.547539520022 76% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 272.7 283.868780488 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 1.53170731707 326% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 27.3998175176 43.030603864 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.125 112.824112599 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.875 22.9334400587 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.23603664747 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.512858534684 0.215688989381 238% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.295776464135 0.103423049105 286% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.133872506695 0.0843802449381 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.372769587086 0.15604864568 239% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.127622837753 0.0819641961636 156% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.2329268293 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 61.2550243902 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.29 11.4140731707 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.59 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.