Medical technology is responsible for the human’s life expectancy. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the phenomenon of medical technologies and its corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matters of the human's life expectancy are highly beneficial, such an issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to conceive that agreeing modern medical technologies can be a plus, and I will investigate that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, efficient medical technologies can provide the society with noticeable effects, which are rooted in the fact that merits, as well as advantages of responsible doctors, are visible. According to my own experience, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the importance of healthy life expectancy. Hence, beneficial ramifications of contemporary medicine are remarkable.
From a scientific point of view, inefficient medical technologies can supply the community with negative impacts, which correlate to the reality that demerits of irresponsible governments are crucial. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by an elite university described short life expectancy. Thus, predicted outcomes of unhealthy lifestyles are critical.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of contemporary medical technologies far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of the human's life expectancy prove the significance of a responsible person, but also pinpoint possible implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 159, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'humans'' or 'human's'?
Suggestion: humans'; human's
...ntested by many that the matters of the humans life expectancy are highly beneficial, ...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 211, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'humans'' or 'human's'?
Suggestion: humans'; human's
...acks. Not only do the advantages of the humans life expectancy prove the significance ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 6.10837438424 65% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 8.36945812808 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 5.94088669951 151% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 20.9802955665 71% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 31.9359605911 81% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.75862068966 69% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1336.0 1207.87684729 111% => OK
No of words: 224.0 242.827586207 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.96428571429 5.00649968141 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86867284054 3.92707691288 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.40110604384 2.71678728327 125% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 139.433497537 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.647321428571 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 437.4 379.143842365 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 2.0 1.57093596059 127% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 1.0 1.56157635468 64% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.65517241379 109% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.5024630542 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7910030997 50.4703680194 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.454545455 104.977214359 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3636363636 20.9669160288 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.25397266985 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.33497536946 37% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.259524115741 0.242375264174 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0795401166718 0.0925447433944 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.061508073836 0.071462118173 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145855895487 0.151781067708 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0621706827664 0.0609392437508 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 12.6369458128 133% => 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: 17.29 11.5310837438 150% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.97 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 55.0591133005 163% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.3980295567 96% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 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.