As people live longer and longer, the idea of cloning human beings in order to provide spare parts is becoming a reality. The idea horrifies most people, yet it is no longer mere science fiction.
To what extent do you agree with such a procedure?
Have you any reservations?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own experience or knowledge.
Cloning of animals has been done since ages to improve the species of animals and improve their breeds. The idea of gaining immortality has always attracted humans and therefore extensive research has been conducted to prolong the life of human beings by replacing the defective organs from human clones. Although this idea remains controversial on moral and ethical grounds but it is no more an impossibility in today’s scientifically advanced era. Human cloning is a controversial issue and in this essay I will discuss whether I agree or disagree with this idea.
Beyond any qualms the idea of prolonging the life of our beloved ones is a fairly attractive vision. There are a myriad of logical ideas to support the theory of human cloning. On one hand, there are millions of children who die due to congenital birth defects. Making human clones for providing spare parts will give them a chance to live life. For example, congestive heart failure is caused due to a defect in heart ventricles which are unable to pump blood due to a hole in the heart. In such cases, the patient who is born with this defect might get a chance to life if they receive spare heart from human clones.
On the contrary, many others believe that it is ethically wrong to make human clones as it will disturb the balance of nature. Humans have evolved by the process of natural selection and they have since ages tried to mold the nature according to their own benefits and greed. Since ages this has proved to be harmful for human survival on earth. For example, the recent COVID19 outbreak has again proved that our survival might be threatened when we try to play with the nature and our environment. Therefore, human cloning can prove harmful as it will disturb the natural balance and the ratio between elderly and younger population.
In conclusion, I believe that it is wrong to make human clones as it will disturb the balance of nature and can prove harmful for our future generations. However, will it be utilized just to treat birth defects in children? Still remains a question.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-08-26 | ankita.hpgdc | 61 | view |
| 2020-08-26 | ankita.hpgdc | 81 | view |
| 2019-06-08 | adeagboridwan | 92 | view |
- Earlier technological developments brought more benefits and changed the lives of ordinary people more than recent developments ever will To what extent do you agree or disagree Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own 73
- Many people only watch sports programs on TV rather than participate in sports Is it good or bad 78
- Some people think that it is more beneficial to take part in sports which are played in teams like football while other people think that taking part in individual sports like tennis or swimming is better Discuss both views and give your own opinion 56
- Every country should have a free health service even if this means that the latest medical treatments may not be available through the service because they are too expensive To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- You should spend about 40 minutes on this task Write about the following topic In some countries it is now illegal to reject someone applying for a job because of his or her age Do you think this is a positive or negative development Give reasons for your 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 114, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'myriads'?
Suggestion: myriads
... fairly attractive vision. There are a myriad of logical ideas to support the theory ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, still, therefore, as to, for example, in conclusion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1721.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 359.0 315.596192385 114% => OK
Chars per words: 4.7938718663 5.12529762239 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35284910392 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5208159548 2.80592935109 90% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518105849582 0.561755894193 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 549.9 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 5.43587174349 18% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.6924629779 49.4020404114 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.6111111111 106.682146367 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9444444444 20.7667163134 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.77777777778 7.06120827912 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.157116561937 0.244688304435 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0533136633378 0.084324248473 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0403582669321 0.0667982634062 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0946320899742 0.151304729494 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038135823544 0.056905535591 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.0946893788 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 50.2224549098 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.4159519038 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 78.4519038076 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.