Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered.
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 argument with recommendation that the inoculations snould not be permitted to be routinely administered is rather weak. It is based on the premises that many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administerd to all people in suffering areas, and that there is a small possibility that a person will die resulting from the inoculations. However, there are still many missed evidenced needed to be explained, as explained in the following paragraphs.
First, the evidence that the cause of death from accepting inoculations is unknown should be verified. The evidence, which will proclaim the instability of the inoculations, will make the recommendation valid, even wise. The uncontrollable of the cure should be taken into the consideration about whether or not the government should use them as a authoritative way to heal the sick. On the other hand, since the evidence is missed, there is a possibility that the cause of the death is founded and controllable easily, concerning some kind of allergy or some living habits, then the policy could be made conductable with the modification of the warnings, which will make the drop of the report of the death and cure many sufferers of the cow flu.
Moreover, the evidence that the possibility of death concerning to inoculations is the same to all kinds of people, the old, the middle-aged or the young is needed to be certified. Even if the cause of death is unfounded, there must be some statistical information about the trends of the death relating to the inoculations. If there happenly is a tendency that the people most vulnerable to cow flus are unaffected by the inoculations, that is, free from the danger of death because of them, then the policy could be reformed to just apply to such people, say the elders, leaving others seemed stronger enough frome the inoculations. The invalidity of he evidences worsens the conclusion, stiring up the demonstration of the evidence.
Furthermore, the evidence that comparing top the flu, the death probability of inoculations are so high that the administering is nothing but another prevailing of fatal diseases ought to be proofed. If the possibility is so high that the death of inoculations are much more than the flu, then the horrible cures ahould not be caried out. On the contrary, if the possibility claimed is such a low number, say just one in one million dies asa a result of them, then the strategy of administering the inoculations is worth setting up. Since the lack of the futher evidence, the uncertainty of whether the doings are most benifiting makes the argument even weaker.
In the end, the argument is rather weak. However, if the above three evidences are testified, it will be greatly reinforced. Therefore, there is no way to simply accept the rgument as truth. Take more facts into consideration before reject it.
Sentence: The argument with recommendation that the inoculations snould not be permitted to be routinely administered is rather weak.
Error: snould Suggestion: should
Sentence: It is based on the premises that many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administerd to all people in suffering areas, and that there is a small possibility that a person will die resulting from the inoculations.
Error: administerd Suggestion: administered
Sentence: If there happenly is a tendency that the people most vulnerable to cow flus are unaffected by the inoculations, that is, free from the danger of death because of them, then the policy could be reformed to just apply to such people, say the elders, leaving others seemed stronger enough frome the inoculations.
Error: frome Suggestion: from
Error: happenly Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: The invalidity of he evidences worsens the conclusion, stiring up the demonstration of the evidence.
Error: stiring Suggestion: string
Sentence: Furthermore, the evidence that comparing top the flu, the death probability of inoculations are so high that the administering is nothing but another prevailing of fatal diseases ought to be proofed.
Error: proofed Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: If the possibility is so high that the death of inoculations are much more than the flu, then the horrible cures ahould not be caried out.
Error: caried Suggestion: carried
Error: ahould Suggestion: should
Sentence: On the contrary, if the possibility claimed is such a low number, say just one in one million dies asa a result of them, then the strategy of administering the inoculations is worth setting up.
Error: asa Suggestion: as
Sentence: Since the lack of the futher evidence, the uncertainty of whether the doings are most benifiting makes the argument even weaker.
Error: benifiting Suggestion: benefiting
Error: futher Suggestion: further
Sentence: Therefore, there is no way to simply accept the rgument as truth.
Error: rgument Suggestion: argument
flaws:
No. of Spelling Errors: 12 2
No. of Words: 480 350 (less words in real exams)
Sentence Length SD: 14.725 7.5
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 12 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 480 350
No. of Characters: 2341 1500
No. of Different Words: 216 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.681 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.877 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.968 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 149 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 111 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 91 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.263 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.725 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.632 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.316 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.549 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.12 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5