tobacco and government
Recently, the phenomenon of the government legislation of tobacco and its corressponding impact on protecting citizens has sparked aheated debate. Although contested by many that individual decision is highly beneficial, such issue might be regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that harmful effects cannot be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the legal standpoint, imposing a rule by governments about smoke prevention can provide the society with noticeable effects, which are rooted in the fact that governmental regulation and harsh punishment are intertwined inextricably with not only higher social security but aslo fewer drug trafficing. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment which discovered a legitimating role. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both smoking cigarettes and tobacco apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of health science, the governmental actions to inact a preventing rule for smoking might increase the consequences of health care. Moreover, fundamental aspects of heath costs can relate to this reality that the demerits of better productivity pertain to health insurance. As a tangible example, a scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of better decision making performance is correlated negatively with smoking drugs. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of smokers.
To conclude, while there are compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of governmental role for preventing populace from smoking far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the disadvatages of smoking prove the significance of legal reforms, but also pinpoint its useful implications.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-11-29 | malihe24t | 85 | view |
| 2018-02-17 | amin_mostafavi | 88 | view |
- new teachers and doctors should work in rural areas at first has or have free choice to select where to work 88
- When computers first appeared on the scene, it was thought they would make us more productive in providing goods and services, smarter and possibly happier. Skeptics claim that the opposite is true as computers have proved disappointing in terms of produc 85
- A competitive environment in school and university would bring excellence and need to be encouraged. To what extent do you agree or disagree？ 85
- child workers and paid job 85
- age discrimination at work 85
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 6.10837438424 115% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 8.36945812808 84% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 20.9802955665 91% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 31.9359605911 110% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.75862068966 191% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1589.0 1207.87684729 132% => OK
No of words: 275.0 242.827586207 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.77818181818 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07223819929 3.92707691288 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2694852629 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 139.433497537 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.650909090909 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 504.9 379.143842365 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.0414167249 50.4703680194 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.416666667 104.977214359 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9166666667 20.9669160288 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.91666666667 7.25397266985 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.116373221493 0.242375264174 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0406500328303 0.0925447433944 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0844506439571 0.071462118173 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0678145085491 0.151781067708 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0684075060784 0.0609392437508 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.3 12.6369458128 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.54 11.5310837438 143% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.99 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 55.0591133005 198% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 76.5 Out of 90
---------------------
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.