An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
Engineering food to combat vitamin A deficiency in diets and improve overall health is a very noble idea. However, since this technology is still relatively new, the public may not be so enthusiastic about it. There will be a lot of questions raised and legal issues that come with it that could prolong the predicted results from occurring.
A major concern for the people of Tagus would be if the government can ensure the engineered millet are safe to consume. How has this been assessed and for how long have subjects been monitored? In developing this product, what trials and standards were utilized to determine the safety of this new breed of millet? Each organization may have different regulations, with some being more stringent than others. Also, if it's a new technology, there's not data on long term effects, i.e. the length of a human life. So what basis would this get FDA approval? If these questions remain unanswered, the Tagus people may view these health concerns to be more dangerous than vitamin A deficiency and be unwilling to consume the millet and results would, if ever to occur, be delayed.
Furthermore, if the seeds of the new millet cost more, the millet sold to consumers will most likely be at a higher price. While farmers have been promised subsidies, there is no mention of the Tagus people being given subsidies or any other government assistance. It is stated the nation of Tagus is impoverished so a majority of people will not able to afford the new breed of millet. If they can't afford it, their priorities for allocating money may go into providing a roof for their family over reducing vitamin A deficiency, hence delaying the predicted result.
Lastly, has the government and the international development organization tested if the engineered millet can grow in the same conditions as the original millet? Has the engineering altered the millet so it needs a different environment to thrive? Small genetic changes can impact how the millet reacts to weather, soil, water levels, and other variables. If the millet can still thrive in its normal environment, the farmers will be able to grow it and the nation has a higher chance of reaching the predicted result. However, if it can't grow in the same environment, the government needs to find new land to grow the millet on so that it is available and be able lower the vitamin A deficiency.
With any new technology, especially in food, there will always be some opposition. It is the responsibility of the government to ensure engineered food is safe, affordable, and available to its people. For the nation of Tagus, answering the above questions would help placate their fears of the unknown. They will be more willing to take the government's recommendation to consume the engineered millet and combat vitamin A deficiency.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the predicted results from occurring. A major concern for the people of Tagus ...
^^^
Line 3, column 420, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...ng more stringent than others. Also, if its a new technology, theres not data on lo...
^^^
Line 3, column 442, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: there's
... others. Also, if its a new technology, theres not data on long term effects, i.e. the...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 396, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...afford the new breed of millet. If they cant afford it, their priorities for allocat...
^^^^
Line 7, column 535, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...ng the predicted result. However, if it cant grow in the same environment, the gover...
^^^^
Line 7, column 535, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'cants'?
Suggestion: cants
...ng the predicted result. However, if it cant grow in the same environment, the gover...
^^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e able lower the vitamin A deficiency. With any new technology, especially in f...
^^^
Line 9, column 343, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'governments'' or 'government's'?
Suggestion: governments'; government's
.... They will be more willing to take the governments recommendation to consume the engineere...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, hence, however, if, lastly, may, so, still, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 13.6137724551 22% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2357.0 2260.96107784 104% => OK
No of words: 477.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94129979036 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67336384929 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80533383096 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.469601677149 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 747.0 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.4525337721 57.8364921388 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.47826087 119.503703932 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7391304348 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.21739130435 5.70786347227 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.453174370176 0.218282227539 208% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126405585719 0.0743258471296 170% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0792280637601 0.0701772020484 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258319491065 0.128457276422 201% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0708735495207 0.0628817314937 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.3799401198 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.