A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal receive little to no professional dental care, while people in suburban areas in the United States see a dentist an average of 1.25 times per year. Thus, regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay.
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument
The argues that regular dental care is not helpful in preventing the tooth decay, because the children in Himalayan region Nepal have low dental issues compared to United states, even though they receive very little dental care. The argument is invalid, because of the above unwarranted assumption by the author.
The author directly compared people in the Himalayan mountain region of Nepal to people in the suburban areas in the United States. It is widely known fact, the chocolates is the one of the primary snack of the people of United States. Which is leading cause for tooth decay worldwide. But Nepal is still a developing country, since the author compared the People of Himalayan Mountain ranges thee chance of the availability of chocolates are less prevalent. Because of this logical fallacy this assumption is invalid. However the argument can be strengthen by providing sufficient information to assert the availability of tooth decaying factor in the Nepal.
The argument has another comparative statistical fallacy, the author fails to takes account of the population of the people in those Himalayan region of Nepal and suburban areas in the United States. The arguments mainly there lower level of tooth decay in the Nepal when compared to United States. However the population of Himalayan region of Nepal will be very low, when compared to Suburban region of United States. In Nepal it can be 1000 tooth decay out of 5000 children and in United States it can 1 million out of 10 million children. Hence obviously the comparison is flawed because of this logical discrepancy. The argument could have held true, if author had provided enough statistical data regarding the number of complaints received in both region.
Because of the above unwarranted assumptions and fallacies the argument fails to convince that regular dental care is not helpful in preventing the tooth decay
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, 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.
... unwarranted assumption by the author. The author directly compared people in the ...
^^^
Line 2, column 459, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ility of chocolates are less prevalent. Because of this logical fallacy this assumption...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 519, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...cal fallacy this assumption is invalid. However the argument can be strengthen by provi...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 79, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'take'.
Suggestion: take
...tatistical fallacy, the author fails to takes account of the population of the people...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 299, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...e Nepal when compared to United States. However the population of Himalayan region of N...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 543, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...n 1 million out of 10 million children. Hence obviously the comparison is flawed beca...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, however, if, regarding, so, still, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 28.8173652695 38% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1595.0 2260.96107784 71% => OK
No of words: 309.0 441.139720559 70% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.16181229773 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63428432838 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 204.123752495 68% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.446601941748 0.468620217663 95% => OK
syllable_count: 511.2 705.55239521 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5877899614 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.333333333 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.4 5.70786347227 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.394183518528 0.218282227539 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140214705435 0.0743258471296 189% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.118614525452 0.0701772020484 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.226754506567 0.128457276422 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.123652421434 0.0628817314937 197% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 98.500998004 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.