Today the demand for cigarettes is proliferating, especially in developing countries. But smokers, meanwhile, are facing assorted serious lung and heart disease with packets of cigarettes as the main culprit. There remains disagreement as to whether products pertinent to tobacco should be forbidden outright by governments when the public health is considered, over which stalwart proponents and tenacious opponents are locking horns. From my perspective, I remain steadfast in support of prohibition of cigarettes.
First of all, manifestly, smoking is prejudicial to our health. Adversely affecting the functioning of heart and arteries, nicotine contained in tobacco heighten the risk of myocardial infarction and others cardiovascular disease. Furthermore, as a psychoactive drug, nicotine produce a feeling of well-being in smokers, which makes smoking become extremely addictive. Additionally, tar and carbon monoxide inhaled with cigarette smoking have been incriminated as causative factors for lung cancer. Every year over a hundred thousand britons are killed by cigarettes, according to a survey. The American government has classified environmental tobacco smoking and asbestos as class one carcinogens. Secondly, the hazard of passive smoking can not be disregarded, which is equivalent to smoking by yourself. In the vast majority of public places, smoking is frown upon. But factually, there always some sections of the smokers deliberately ignoring the signs 'NOT SMOKING', lighting up a cigarette and smothering the public, even though in non-smoking areas. This is a unethical and antisocial behavior we would doubtless protest, but sometimes when we are confronted with those people without goodwill, there is seemingly nothing we can do to stop it. Thirdly, only by wholly banning tobacco can smokers abstain from smoking. Individuals who have swore off cigarettes generally talk the talk but they don't walk the walk. Quitting smoking is a long-term campaign, in which masses of people surrender to temptation and abandon their attempts.
Also noteworthy is the fact that cigarettes are considered environmentally unsound. For one thing, hazardous air pollutants released with stinking yellow tobacco smoking foul up the air. And the another, discarded cigarette ends may spark a small brush fire, the fire spreading rapidly, even sweeping through a forest.
Admittedly, cigarette industry is a double-edged, spelling disaster for health but boosting the economy. As a pivotal and essential tax source, tobacco industry bring huge profits to the government. This is why the authorities drag their feet over forbidding the production and sale of cigarettes. Nevertheless, under no circumstances should we enrich ourselves at the expense of the public health.
By the way of conclusion, I reaffirm my position that a policy of zero tolerance for cigarettes and relevant tobacco products should be exercised by government whose the first priority must be the health of people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 237, Rule ID: WHETHER[6]
Message: Can you shorten this phrase to just 'whether', or rephrase the sentence to avoid "as to"?
Suggestion: whether
...ain culprit. There remains disagreement as to whether products pertinent to tobacco should be...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1065, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...en though in non-smoking areas. This is a unethical and antisocial behavior we wo...
^
Line 3, column 1346, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'sworn'.
Suggestion: sworn
...tain from smoking. Individuals who have swore off cigarettes generally talk the talk ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 1400, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...rettes generally talk the talk but they dont walk the walk. Quitting smoking is a lo...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...unless tobacco is inhibited utterly. Also noteworthy is the fact that cigarettes ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 161, Rule ID: WHOSE_DT[5]
Message: Did you mean 'who's'?
Suggestion: who's
...ducts should be exercised by government whose the first priority must be the health o...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, furthermore, if, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, well, while, as to, by the way, first of all, for one thing
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 13.1623246493 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 10.4138276553 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2689.0 1615.20841683 166% => OK
No of words: 471.0 315.596192385 149% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.70912951168 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65859790218 4.20363070211 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09371187115 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 285.0 176.041082164 162% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.605095541401 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 823.5 506.74238477 163% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 16.0721442886 162% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.9502138991 49.4020404114 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.423076923 106.682146367 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1153846154 20.7667163134 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.19230769231 7.06120827912 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.01903807615 120% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 3.9879759519 376% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240646009685 0.244688304435 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0578503552682 0.084324248473 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0383955337484 0.0667982634062 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121361353274 0.151304729494 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0371090014171 0.056905535591 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.54 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.06 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 165.0 78.4519038076 210% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.