Medical technology is responsible for increasing the average life expectancy. Do you think it is a blessing or a curse?
Over the last decade, the matter of medicine has aroused a growing controversy. While some people adhere to the belief that the little effect of medical technology might have merits, I would lean towards the idea that increasing life expectancy could provide more benefits. In the next paragraphs, I will outline the most significant reasons for upholding this standpoint.
Apropos of medical technological advancements, the distinguishing features of a better healthcare system would positively influence health improvements, meaning that well-equipped hospitals and more specialized doctors are vital elements. Furthermore, technological equipment could be largely attributed to accurate disease diagnosis due to some determining factors. For example, recent practical experiments conducted by some pioneering scientists have revealed that science enhancements and technology developments would produce satisfactory outcomes. Hence, it is evident that medical technological innovations could be highly credible.
Nevertheless, a dramatic increase in a lack of medical technology is closely associated with wrong diagnosis, which might have several repercussions. Such a strong association contributes significantly to either increased rate of death or chronic illnesses. As a notable example, research findings in the field of sociology have demonstrated that the negative aspects of conventional treatments not only culminate in health issues but also trigger unintended consequences. Therefore, it is logical to deduce that traditional medical treatments could prove the premise of decreasing life expectancy.
In conclusion, after weighing up both strengths and weaknesses, I firmly argue that the disadvantages of developing life expectancy would pale into insignificance when compared to the advantages. Although there is valuable evidence supporting the ignorance of medical technology, some potential impediments also should be noted.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-29 | mohammadsabet | 77 | view |
| 2019-03-19 | Kushi | 45 | view |
- Medical technology is responsible for increasing the average life expectancy Do you think it is a blessing or a curse 77
- Some say that in today s world the value of humanities has been eclipsed by the necessity of preparing for specific wealth producing careers such as medicine Discuss whether you think there is a role in today s changing world for study of the humanities 85
- Voting is mandatory in most of the countries across the globe What is your point of view on the same Do you agree with the notion of obligatory voting If it is compulsory in a democratic society what conclusions can we draw about Nature of democracy 88
- Some people think that the teenage years are the happiest times of most people s lives Others think that adult life brings more happiness in spite of greater responsibilities Discuss both these views and give your own opinion 77
- Nowadays it is increasingly more difficult to maintain the right balance between work and the other aspects of one s life such as leisure pursuits with family members How important do you think this balance is What are the reasons that make some people th 77
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, if, nevertheless, so, therefore, well, while, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.5418719212 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 6.10837438424 196% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 20.9802955665 67% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 31.9359605911 88% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1684.0 1207.87684729 139% => OK
No of words: 269.0 242.827586207 111% => OK
Chars per words: 6.26022304833 5.00649968141 125% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.38896877857 2.71678728327 125% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 139.433497537 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.684014869888 0.580463131201 118% => OK
syllable_count: 535.5 379.143842365 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.0 1.57093596059 127% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 12.6551724138 103% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8233566102 50.4703680194 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.538461538 104.977214359 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6923076923 20.9669160288 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.92307692308 7.25397266985 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.201748886486 0.242375264174 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0650105876892 0.0925447433944 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0455058728405 0.071462118173 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115990254128 0.151781067708 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0265359956404 0.0609392437508 44% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.4 12.6369458128 146% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 17.34 53.1260098522 33% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.9458128079 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 19.03 11.5310837438 165% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.32 8.32886699507 136% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 55.0591133005 207% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.94827586207 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.5123152709 124% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, if, nevertheless, so, therefore, well, while, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.5418719212 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 6.10837438424 196% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 20.9802955665 67% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 31.9359605911 88% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.75862068966 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1684.0 1207.87684729 139% => OK
No of words: 269.0 242.827586207 111% => OK
Chars per words: 6.26022304833 5.00649968141 125% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.38896877857 2.71678728327 125% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 139.433497537 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.684014869888 0.580463131201 118% => OK
syllable_count: 535.5 379.143842365 141% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.0 1.57093596059 127% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.931034482759 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 12.6551724138 103% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8233566102 50.4703680194 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.538461538 104.977214359 123% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6923076923 20.9669160288 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.92307692308 7.25397266985 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 6.9802955665 86% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.201748886486 0.242375264174 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0650105876892 0.0925447433944 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0455058728405 0.071462118173 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115990254128 0.151781067708 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0265359956404 0.0609392437508 44% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.4 12.6369458128 146% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 17.34 53.1260098522 33% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 10.9458128079 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 19.03 11.5310837438 165% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.32 8.32886699507 136% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 55.0591133005 207% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.94827586207 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.5123152709 124% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.