An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
To tackle a vitamin A deficiency, the international development organization proposes a new variety of millet which is high in vitamin A. This stands as a much more direct fix to the problem and one that is overlooked in many aspects of its viability. Thus, before adopting such a recommendation, two significant arguments need to be discussed.
Keeping in mind, that the new breed of vitamin A-rich millet is engineered, a major question arises what kind of side effects pose a threat to the general public? The new variety of millet has been engineered to have a higher concentration of vitamin A but as with any other engineered product, how is the safety and health of the consumer guaranteed in the short-term as well as the long-term perspective? Considering, that the citizens of Tagus accept adopting this new variety of millet, do the millet side effects vary according to different age groups? A normal family of three generations may adopt this new millet and find themselves prone to sickness, and ill health varying as their age groups.
As stated that the government of Tagus will be providing subsidies to farmers for purchasing these new seeds, which will cost more than the normal millet seeds, a question needs to be asked how much does it affect the pocket of the common consumer? Though farmers are given subsidies to buy the seeds, it is the final consumer at the retail who is purchasing this processed new variety of millet and who will be paying more from his or her own pocket. To tackle vitamin A deficiency, the government chose to raise the production of a new variety of millet which may not be cost-friendly to its own population. If provided argument holds true, then consumers may opt out of purchasing the costlier vitamin A-rich millet and go for the conventional goods they have been consuming.
In conclusion, the adoption of such a solution for the problem of vitamin A deficiency could come up with much overlooked smaller problems including exacerbating the health of the population, and the public exclusion of this new millet. The government must also look towards other potential solutions to tackle this problem, perhaps subsidizing and raising the production of already existing naturally present high in vitamin A goods for the public.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-20 | Dinesh4518 | 63 | view |
| 2023-08-11 | Nowshin Tabassum | 69 | view |
| 2023-07-21 | Gnyana | 68 | view |
| 2023-07-20 | Prasad002 | 59 | view |
| 2023-07-08 | tanvik21 | 74 | view |
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers 58
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected However since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations we cannot permit i 78
- An international development organization in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A While seeds for this new type of millet cost more farmers will be paid 54
- All too often companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees such consultants would be unnecessary 79
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 383 350
No. of Characters: 1866 1500
No. of Different Words: 189 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.424 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.872 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.796 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 69 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 31.917 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.096 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.411 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.624 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.134 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 148, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...nd of side effects pose a threat to the general public? The new variety of millet has been eng...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 252, Rule ID: A_BUT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'a bit'?
Suggestion: A bit
... have a higher concentration of vitamin A but as with any other engineered product, h...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 195, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...seeds, a question needs to be asked how much does it affect the pocket of the common...
^^^^
Line 7, column 427, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'A good' or simply 'goods'?
Suggestion: A good; Goods
...sting naturally present high in vitamin A goods for the public.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, may, so, then, thus, well, in conclusion, kind of, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1907.0 2260.96107784 84% => OK
No of words: 383.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97911227154 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88280923222 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 204.123752495 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506527415144 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 590.4 705.55239521 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 48.0450971583 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.692307692 119.503703932 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.4615384615 23.324526521 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.30769230769 5.70786347227 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.401188903513 0.218282227539 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.149427935177 0.0743258471296 201% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0799184354809 0.0701772020484 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.240533829806 0.128457276422 187% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0402684811542 0.0628817314937 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 14.3799401198 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.2 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.