The increase in food production is mostly due to fertilisers and better machinery. Yet, some think that it harms human health and communities. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Fertilisers and machinery are largely responsible for the dramatic growth in food production in recent years. In contrast, some people contend that this has detrimental impacts on our health and community as well.
First, fertilisers have adverse effects on people’s physical well-being. Cancer rates have increased dramatically in the last fifty years. A number of doctors and researchers believe that the chemicals used to grow and produce foods is a significant cause. Thus, farmers have been suing producers of chemical fertilisers for this. The advanced machinery has also contributed substantially to individuals’ health. Processed foods that come from factory farms and are massively produced in a manner which puts people at higher risk of disease. Machines can grind food up into attractive shapes that appear delicious but are packed full of chemicals and preservatives to last longer on shelves. Consuming such pre-prepared foods may result in chronic diseases such as heart-related problems and diabetes.
Manures and technologically advanced machinery are potentially hazardous to the society in general. When people get cancer and become much more obese, this puts a considerable burden on the healthcare system. America even spends more than the next five countries combined on health care. A significant reason for health expenses is the consumption of processed foods which are much cheaper than simple foods. Never in history have we seen the poor so much more overweight than the affluent. Machines have made processed foods less prohibitive than genuine food. Additionally, national productivity will be considerably reduced if people are less healthy as a result of machine-produced food. The life expectancy may lower, people may have less energy at work, and there may be more sick days taken. An eye-opening example is militaries around the world must make physical requirements easier. We seem to be getting weaker as a whole and factory farming may play a significant role in this.
In conclusion, with the help of fertilisers and machinery, the amount of food which have been generated is increasing exponentially. However, I believe that the impacts on human health and national productivity are of great concern.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-10-06 | MorganConsort | 84 | view |
| 2021-12-10 | minhminhvu7 | 84 | view |
- The graph below shows information about the activities that Australian and New Zealand children enjoy doing the most in 2007 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 82
- Some people say that advertising encourages us to buy things that we really do not need Others say that advertisements tell us about new products that may improve our lives Discuss both views and give your own opinion 89
- We cannot help everyone in the world that needs help so we should only be concerned with our own communities and countries To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 78
- Today many children spend a lot of time playing computer games and little time on sports. Why is it? Is it a positive or negative development. 61
- The graph below shows information about the activities that New Zealand and Austalian children ẹnjoy doing the most in 2007. 11
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 410, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[1]
Message: The adverb 'Never' is usually not used at the beginning of a sentence.
...ich are much cheaper than simple foods. Never in history have we seen the poor so muc...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, thus, well, in conclusion, in contrast, in general, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.3376753507 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1903.0 1615.20841683 118% => OK
No of words: 348.0 315.596192385 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.4683908046 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05503289468 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583333333333 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 595.8 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 16.0721442886 137% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.2975951904 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 22.0752376137 49.4020404114 45% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 86.5 106.682146367 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8181818182 20.7667163134 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.09090909091 7.06120827912 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.159294299236 0.244688304435 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0495676938631 0.084324248473 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0428851708863 0.0667982634062 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130478719847 0.151304729494 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0523313410202 0.056905535591 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.0946893788 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 50.2224549098 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.15 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.58950901804 105% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 78.4519038076 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.1190380762 79% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.