The author argues that routine administration of inoculations to all people in areas where the disease is found might save a lot of lives and author also adds that there is a chance that a person may pass away due to periodic intake of inoculations. The above argument can be flawed because it lies on unsupported assumption.
The author assumes that inoculations is the only cause for reduction of cow flu. Since the above assumption is not mentioned clearly what if the people in affected are aware of flu and started to take care about their health by following hygienic diet and doing regular work outs moreover by avoiding outside food. If the author would have mentioned clearly that people did not change their food habits and followed same diet before the flu affected the area and at present.
The author also assumes that vaccination should be given routinely to all people. Since the above assumption is not mentioned clearly what if routine vaccination may lead to over dosage in children. If author would have mentioned clearly that regular dosage to children and adults is same and it does not affect any one due to over dosage.
The author assume that there is a small possibility of a person to die due to regular intake of inoculations. Since the above assumption is not mentioned clearly what if people might have died due to accidents and also author did not mention the number of people died. If the author would have mentioned clearly that people died only because of regular in take of inoculations and the count of the humans died due to inoculations.
The author argument fails because it has following flaws statistical, causal, sampling.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...e it lies on unsupported assumption. The author assumes that inoculations is the...
^^^
Line 3, column 330, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had mentioned'?
Suggestion: had mentioned
...by avoiding outside food. If the author would have mentioned clearly that people did not change thei...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 210, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had mentioned'?
Suggestion: had mentioned
...d to over dosage in children. If author would have mentioned clearly that regular dosage to children...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 12, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'assumes'.
Suggestion: assumes
...y one due to over dosage. The author assume that there is a small possibility of a ...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 284, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had mentioned'?
Suggestion: had mentioned
...he number of people died. If the author would have mentioned clearly that people died only because o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, may, moreover, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1391.0 2260.96107784 62% => OK
No of words: 285.0 441.139720559 65% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88070175439 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61119591488 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 204.123752495 62% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.445614035088 0.468620217663 95% => OK
syllable_count: 451.8 705.55239521 64% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 4.96107784431 0% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.6946037681 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.916666667 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.75 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.25 5.70786347227 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.208622531177 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0893909043453 0.0743258471296 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0704747892463 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117364161074 0.128457276422 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0841291691482 0.0628817314937 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.3799401198 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.27 8.32208582834 87% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 98.500998004 46% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.