It is true that some people argue for more
public expenditure spent on disease
prevention by encouraging a healthy lifestyle
than on medical treatments. I disagree with
this view because government should stress
more importance on curing illnesses.
On the one hand, the reasons why people hold
a belief for the promotion of a healthy lifestyle
to prevent illness are varied. One of the
convincing arguments is that the sedentary
routines of many people make them more
prone to the risk of diabetes or heart disease
as a result of their inactivity. In modern life,
people are so caught up in the pressures
of work or study that they neglect the
importance of keeping fit. Moreover,
dependence on the car exacerbates the
problem associated with the lack of exercise.
Daily commuters do not consider cycling to
their workplace as the means of getting
regular exercise. Thus, government provision
of affordable leisure and sports facilities,
coupled with promotion campaigns to keep
fit and healthy would certainly be a
worthwhile initiative to raise the general level
of public health.
On the other hand, in the process of
decision-making on health matters, I am
in favor of the opinion that expenditure
on curing diseases contracted by the
public should be given more priorities.
Firstly, not all illnesses are the result of
unhealthy lifestyle choices by individuals.
For example, respiratory disorders are
affected by air pollution in cities, while
poor sanitation and contaminated
drinking water contribute to outbreaks of
cholera and dysentery. Secondly, the failure
to subsidize medicines or to invest in
hospitals would certainly lead to many
deaths which could have been avoided
by timely treatment. Hospitals, for
instance, have many roles in providing
treatment, not only surgery but also in
conducting vital research into the
treatment of many life-threatening
conditions, such as cancer or asthma.
In conclusion, although it is undeniable that
encouraging the pursuit of healthy routines
results in certain benefits, I strongly believe
that increased investment in medical services makes further contributions to the
improvement of public health.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 48, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... conditions, such as cancer or asthma. In conclusion, although it is undeniable...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, thus, while, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1920.0 1615.20841683 119% => OK
No of words: 338.0 315.596192385 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.68047337278 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28774723029 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04673975873 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 201.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.594674556213 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 578.7 506.74238477 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 13.0 4.76152304609 273% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.191317649 49.4020404114 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.142857143 106.682146367 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1428571429 20.7667163134 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0714285714 7.06120827912 157% => OK
Paragraphs: 51.0 4.38176352705 1164% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.259450465224 0.244688304435 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0821975210739 0.084324248473 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0799941078297 0.0667982634062 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0403341372635 0.151304729494 27% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0549848768717 0.056905535591 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 13.0946893788 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 50.2224549098 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.3001002004 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.96 12.4159519038 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.92 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 78.4519038076 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.
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.