Every organism possesses genes. These genes provide the organism with its natural characteristics. The number of apples a tree will produce can be considered a result of its genetic makeup. With new technologies, researchers have been able to alter the genes of certain food crops to impart on them more beneficial and profitable characteristics. This genetic modification offers a number of benefits.
First, through genetic modification, researchers can produce better crops with attributes that would take centuries to produce in any other way. This speed is an incredible benefit for our society and farmers. The current species of wheat grown in most farms produces very high yields. This is a result of centuries of selective breeding by farmers. Researchers can today achieve the same result in decades through genetic modification.
Also, genetically modified foods are safe. These foods must pass through extensive testing. In the United States, they must be tested for nine years before they can be released. One important form of testing that occurs during this time is peer review. In this form of testing, scientists across the world evaluate and test research by duplicating it to ensure accuracy and truth; and, research has shown again and again that genetically modified foods pose no major health risks to consumers.
Finally, genetic modification creates crops that underdeveloped countries can use to alleviate food shortage and avoid famine. Some modifications have rendered plants more able to survive with less water. These crops can prove especially helpful in underdeveloped countries where water shortage is common. The added benefit of solving food shortage problems without the need of significant loans provides another advantage for developing countries. Without the reliance on foreign aid to solve this important issue, these nations’ economies can develop without the burden of heavy loan payments.
The reading states that genetic modification of food crops offers a number of benefits, and gives three reasons of support. However, the lecturer claims that although genetic modification has some benefits, it has many drawbacks. He attacks each of the claims made by the author.
First, the author asserts that it can produce better crops faster than any other way. However, the lecturer thinks there are some flaws in the author’s argument. He goes on to say that the example of current species of grown wheat that produces very high yields cannot be achieved through genetic modification. He explains that these crops came after centuries of experiments from the farmers and after an experience with many different environments
.
Second, the passage claims that genetically modified foods are safe. On the contrary, the lecturer says the safety is questionable. He explains that the studies of safety are done by companies that rarely publish them. This is because they don’t want anyone to copy the products and steal their effort. However, this obliges the science community from reviewing these studies and from being sure it is safe.
Third, the reading states that underdeveloped countries can use it to alleviate food shortage and avoid famine. Again, the professor disagrees. He explains that it can’t solve this problem for two reasons. The first one is that these countries don’t have the appropriate infrastructure to transform and distribute the food. Moreover, genetic modification is often used to produce high-quality kinds of foods that are not helpful with famines, which means not the ones that can save these countries from famines.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 427, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...he farmers and after an experience with many different environments. Second, the passage clai...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, third, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 22.412803532 152% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1414.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 265.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3358490566 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74875032287 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581132075472 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 431.1 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.8818048919 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.1764705882 110.228320801 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.5882352941 21.698381199 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.05882352941 7.06452816374 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0340830394033 0.272083759551 13% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0090197857196 0.0996497079465 9% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0162240268118 0.0662205650399 24% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.019320018111 0.162205337803 12% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0154881214052 0.0443174109184 35% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.