The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia."Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, f

Essay topics:

The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia.

"Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, for the past several decades, food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study. Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia."

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

The study stating that the headache suffered by residents of Mentia has declined after using salicylates bythe food processing companies may seem plausible at first glance, but the argument rests on unwarranted assumptions and is rife with fallacies that need further clarity.
First, the scope and validity of the survey linking increase in use of salicylates and decline in headache to be questioned. How much reduction in pain did they feel? More quantitative date is needed to precisely determine the extent to which the change was observed. Also the standard to which it was compared is also not clearly stated. Moreover, If the participants are those who do not suffer a severe headache or if they are people from the control group of the study then the survey resuts will be skewed. It is also possible that the decline of headaches might be the caused by other medications taken by particpants.
Second, the time duration of study is twenty years. It is possible that the scenario during the start of study and after 20 years might not be the same. For example, if 100 people suffered from headche 20 years back,some might have changed their lifestyle or were on other medication to reduce it. If they take part in a study after 20 years, the results will be biased.
It is highly likely that the salicylates on it's own is not very potential in management of headache like aspirin because the compound was not tested for it's property in isolation. It is possible that they interacted with other compounds in the food product. Another likely scenario is that the effectiveness of salicylates were gradually accumulated for 20 years. Thus if this is true it might take another 20 years for it to show major effect.

Lastly, the claim that the addition of salicylates as flavouring agent will further reduce the incident of headache is very vague. The concentration used for preservatives and flavoring agent may differ and it is possible that salicylates have a threshold concentration to show its potency. Then the argument is rendered futile. The other way round is also possible, if the salicylates in the form of preservatives and flavoring agents show antagonistic property then the effect will be nullified. Thus firmly concluding that this new use will reduce the occurrences of headaches suffered by an average citizen is difficult.

In summary, the author's argument is not entirely invalid, but had he/she considered the aforementioned points, it would help to buttress his/her claim. Thus careful analysis of survey and data is required.

Votes
Average: 5.8 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 268, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...xtent to which the change was observed. Also the standard to which it was compared i...
^^^^
Line 3, column 216, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , some
...ople suffered from headche 20 years back,some might have changed their lifestyle or w...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 365, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ere gradually accumulated for 20 years. Thus if this is true it might take another 2...
^^^^
Line 6, column 499, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...erty then the effect will be nullified. Thus firmly concluding that this new use wil...
^^^^
Line 8, column 17, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...itizen is difficult. In summary, the authors argument is not entirely invalid, but h...
^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 153, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...t would help to buttress his/her claim. Thus careful analysis of survey and data is ...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, lastly, may, moreover, second, so, then, thus, for example, in summary

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2140.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 425.0 441.139720559 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03529411765 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54043259262 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81048358705 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 204.123752495 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494117647059 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 684.0 705.55239521 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.2583152562 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.2727272727 119.503703932 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3181818182 23.324526521 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.18181818182 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.148772668014 0.218282227539 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0405705792162 0.0743258471296 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0414757497718 0.0701772020484 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0778462765778 0.128457276422 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0510268742033 0.0628817314937 81% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 98.500998004 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?

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

Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.