Medical technology can increase the humans life expectancy Is it blessing or curse

The colossal upsurge of technology has brought many technological advancements in the field of medical science. Promising experiment conducted to increase human life expectancy is a blessing or a curse is a widely debated . I am entirely of the opinion, that increasing life expectancy is a curse for mankind and I will explain why in the following paragraphs.

There are a myriads of arguments in favor of my stance. The most preponderant one is that increasing life expectancy can lead to overpopulation of the Earth. The population of the Earth is already at a huge number and is increasing daily. If the number death toll widely increase, there will a huge population overfill and can lead to many problems. For example, the basic needs of people such as food, water, shelter, and so on could not be met if the population increase. The amount of pollution will also increase with more people. This can lead to the extinction of mankind.

Another pivotal aspect of this argument is that, this can lead to the extinction of mankind. The amount of pollution will increase with more number of people. The carbon dioxide oxygen ratio will be out of balance and can lead to destruction of ozone layer, global warming, increase in temperature, and so on.

In conclusion, in view of the arguments mentioned above, one can conclude the medical technology advancement which increase humans life expectancy is a curse. In my opinion, this apprehension is unwanted and should be rejected.

Votes
Average: 5.5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 222, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... blessing or a curse is a widely debated . I am entirely of the opinion, that incr...
^^
Line 3, column 11, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a myriad' or simply 'myriads'?
Suggestion: a myriad; myriads
... the following paragraphs. There are a myriads of arguments in favor of my stance. The...
^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, so, for example, in conclusion, such as, in my opinion

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.5418719212 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 6.10837438424 213% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 8.36945812808 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 5.94088669951 67% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 20.9802955665 52% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 31.9359605911 113% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 5.75862068966 243% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1243.0 1207.87684729 103% => OK
No of words: 248.0 242.827586207 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01209677419 5.00649968141 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 3.92707691288 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95139466559 2.71678728327 109% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 139.433497537 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.512096774194 0.580463131201 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 401.4 379.143842365 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.57093596059 102% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.6157635468 108% => OK
Article: 7.0 1.56157635468 448% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.71428571429 58% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.65517241379 82% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 12.6551724138 119% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.5024630542 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.1835568008 50.4703680194 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.8666666667 104.977214359 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5333333333 20.9669160288 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.26666666667 7.25397266985 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 2.75862068966 217% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.421659516883 0.242375264174 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.130872601156 0.0925447433944 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.137258394091 0.071462118173 192% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.274931045916 0.151781067708 181% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.15478863982 0.0609392437508 254% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 12.6369458128 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.1260098522 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.54236453202 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.9458128079 87% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.48 11.5310837438 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.32886699507 99% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 55.0591133005 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.94827586207 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.3980295567 81% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.5123152709 86% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 55.5555555556 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 50.0 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.