In the past people ate food that was better for their health than they do today. 4
It is an undeniable fact that the quality of the food we eat plays a crucial role in our lives. Having proper nutrition is a must for being healthy and owning a favorable life. There are many people who believe that in the past, what people consumed as food was healthier than what we eat these days. Personally, I believe that these days people eat healthier food than before. I feel this way mainly is routed in the science advancement, detecting and preventing diseases from contaminated food has become much easier. Moreover, technology of food preservation has been progressing and spreading increasingly. I will attempt to address the most discernible reasons in the ensuing lines.
The first outstanding point which deserves some words here is that rapid advances in medical sciences has empowered human kind to detect improper food products and prevent their consumption. Otherwise, various types of diseases which are caused by unhealthy foods in the past would yet prevalent but are now understood and controlled. For example, one time, my grandfather told me about a disaster in his village which had been caused from so called “Malta fever”. He said that more than half of the village’s population became sick and nobody knew neither the reason for their sickness nor how to cure them. He said that many died during a few years, and After years, researchers found out that they had gotten the Malta fever because of infected dairies. Nowadays, milk and dairies that we buy from store are all checked for such diseases. Thus, the chance of getting such diseases like Malt fever is almost zero. This shows how scientific improvements have enabled human beings to access healthy food.
Second important reason worth mentioning is that the technology of preserving food for a long time has enhanced dramatically. Put differently, today we can save our food for months without being worried about it going rotten. For example, a hundred years ago, having to use traditional methods for storing and conserving their food, people had no access to such a thing as freezer. As an example, they used salt to preserve meat for a long time, which increased the risk of consuming it after some days today, such appliances used at home to preserve fresh meat for months are freezers. Hence, understanding better methods and having access to more advanced instruments, today we can preserve food with lower risk for a longer time.
To sum up, progressing in detecting and preventing food-related diseases and food preservation methods, we are able to access more healthy food. Indeed, the result of this healthy food is apparent in the number of deaths from consumption of unhealthy food around the world, which has decreased dramatically over the recent decades.
- In the past, people ate food that was better for their health than they do today. Do you agree or disagree? 73
- Some adults believe that nowadays children’s behavior is worse than children’s behavior was in the past. These adults have suggested three actions that parents can do to help children ages 5–10 behave better (for example, by speaking more respectful 73
- In the past, people ate food that was better for their health than they do today. Do you agree or disagree? 78
- In the past people ate food that was better for their health than they do today. 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours. Use spec 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, if, moreover, second, so, thus, for example, i feel, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 15.1003584229 119% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 9.8082437276 51% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 43.0788530466 91% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 52.1666666667 100% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.0752688172 99% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2331.0 1977.66487455 118% => OK
No of words: 458.0 407.700716846 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08951965066 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72768251491 2.67179642975 102% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 212.727598566 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56768558952 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 699.3 618.680645161 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.94265232975 20% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.7433012072 48.9658058833 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.954545455 100.406767564 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8181818182 20.6045352989 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.68181818182 5.45110844103 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.288542646716 0.236089414692 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0783366505517 0.076458572812 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.055774247323 0.0737576698707 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166779954225 0.150856017488 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0506716554455 0.0645574589148 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 58.1214874552 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.1575268817 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 10.9000537634 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.01818996416 105% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 86.8835125448 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.