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 impacts have sparked a heated debate. Although, contested by many that the matter of human's life expectancy is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that being responsible in personal life can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social stand point, the medical development can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the merits of underdeveloped countries, as well as low-quality life style, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic research which discovered medicine technological improvement. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both medical industries and social sanitation apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of technology, well-educated medical students might increase the consequences of the healthy life. Moreover, fundamental aspects of accepting medical responsibilities relate to this reality that the demerits of 21st-century technologies pertain to medical-based activities. As a tangible example, a scientific study undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of the poor life expectancy is correlated negatively with human's medical opportunities. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of modern international technologies.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of people's life standards far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of medical-balanced living methods prove the significance of technology-based attributions, but also pinpoint medical implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 378, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... which discovered medicine technological improvement. Thus, beneficial ramificati...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 6.10837438424 82% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 31.9359605911 100% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.75862068966 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1580.0 1207.87684729 131% => OK
No of words: 264.0 242.827586207 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.98484848485 5.00649968141 120% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 3.92707691288 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.60850280174 2.71678728327 133% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 139.433497537 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.666666666667 0.580463131201 115% => OK
syllable_count: 513.0 379.143842365 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.57093596059 121% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 3.0 1.56157635468 192% => 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: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.0757569096 50.4703680194 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.666666667 104.977214359 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.9669160288 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.41666666667 7.25397266985 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.219778626519 0.242375264174 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0724270672233 0.0925447433944 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0425290340651 0.071462118173 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128302933673 0.151781067708 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0367490358646 0.0609392437508 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 12.6369458128 140% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.77 53.1260098522 45% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 10.9458128079 141% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.4 11.5310837438 151% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.13 8.32886699507 134% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 55.0591133005 194% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 10.5123152709 171% => 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.