Medical technology is responsible for the human’s life expectancy. To what extent do you agree or disagree
Recently, the phenomenon of medical technology and the corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of modern method of medical treatment is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the matter of medical technology to improve life expectancy can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, the latest medical technology can provide the society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that merits of remote surgery, as well as the treatment of serious disease, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience when I was a university student, I performed an academic research which discovered the influence of advanced medical technology on improving the life expectancy. Thus beneficial ramification of both the conventional treatment and the herbal therapy apparently can be seen.
Within the realm of medical science, the latest developed medical methods might increase the consequences of the sense of well-being. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of the fatal illnesses could relate to this reality that the demerit of incurable disease pertains to lack of medical technology. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that the downside of medical knowledge is correlated negatively with lack of medicine. It is correct to presume the preconceived notion of the supplements.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that the benefits of medical technology for enhancing life expectancy far outweigh its drawbacks. Not only do the advantages of the conventional treatment prove the significance of advanced medical devices, but also pinpoint practical implications.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 435, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ology on improving the life expectancy. Thus beneficial ramification of both the con...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, 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: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 8.36945812808 60% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 20.9802955665 81% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 31.9359605911 125% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1632.0 1207.87684729 135% => OK
No of words: 289.0 242.827586207 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.64705882353 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18595503782 2.71678728327 117% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 139.433497537 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59169550173 0.580463131201 102% => OK
syllable_count: 529.2 379.143842365 140% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.7590603223 50.4703680194 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.0 104.977214359 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0833333333 20.9669160288 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.83333333333 7.25397266985 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => 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: 0.191332270619 0.242375264174 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0655928851646 0.0925447433944 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0455334653297 0.071462118173 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11556437654 0.151781067708 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0306585987321 0.0609392437508 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 12.6369458128 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 53.1260098522 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.79 11.5310837438 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.67 8.32886699507 128% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 55.0591133005 194% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.5123152709 143% => 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.