Medical technology is responsible for the human’s life expectancy. To what extent do you . agree or disagree?
Recently the phenomenon of medical technology has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of medical development if highly beneficial; such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that medical upgraded instruments can be a plus, and I will analyze it throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, human’s life expectancy can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the merits of life facilities as well as life obstacles are inextricably bound up. According to my experience, when I was a university student I performed an academic experiment which discovered positive relation between life expectancy and wealth. Thus, the beneficial ramifications of wealthy life are presumed.
Within the realm of science, au courant human life might increase the consequences of influences of technology on human life duration. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of means of living are related to this reality that demerits of internet-base duties as well as prevailing online facilities pertain to developed society. As a tangible example, some research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that updated utilitarian application is negatively related with life shortage. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of technology’s correlation with life expectancy.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of nowadays utilities far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do advantages of social network prove the significance of harmful influence of internet, but also pinpoint ease of access implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, 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 : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1509.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 262.0 315.596192385 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.75954198473 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30391741532 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 176.041082164 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.652671755725 0.561755894193 116% => OK
syllable_count: 495.9 506.74238477 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.7501517909 49.4020404114 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.75 106.682146367 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8333333333 20.7667163134 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.41666666667 7.06120827912 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.212833512186 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0722858260053 0.084324248473 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0658910615592 0.0667982634062 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10543524372 0.151304729494 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0567759043549 0.056905535591 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.0946893788 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 24.78 50.2224549098 49% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 12.4159519038 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.07 8.58950901804 129% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 78.4519038076 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.