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.
COnclusion: Regular dental care is not helping to prevent decaying of tooth.
Assumption: children living in the himalayan doesnt have where peopleof us has
Himalayan no consultation where US consults
Unstated: How organised are children of 2 diff areas like do they brush regularyy?
Do children eat chocolates more in US than in nepal
How accurate is the study
In a recent study, it is stated that visiting a dental care for children is not helping to prevent a tooth decay. This conclusion is made on the assumption that children living in the Himalayan region of Nepal doesn't have any tooth problems and they won't consult a dentist where children in sub urban areas of USA consult a dentist and even then they have tooth decaying problems. However, after more light is shed on the issue and more detailed facts are concerned, lack of answers through the argument, makes me to question its validity.
First of all, how accurate is the study? In other words, did the survey took the inputs from all the children or only specific children. It might be possible that survey chose the wrong children because they might have taken the answers from the children who are not suffering in Nepal and kids who are suffering in the USA. If the above mentioned scenario is merit, then the argument is weakened.
Secondly, how organized are children in Nepal and in USA. It is possible that Nepal children are taking good care of their teeth whereas children of USA might not. Perhaps, Nepal children are brushing thrice in a day whereas USA children maybe brushing only once. If the above assumption is true, then the argument doesn't hold water.
Finally, do children eat more chocolate in USA than in Nepal? Maybe kids in USA have different varieties of chocolate whereas Nepal people doesn't have. If this true, then it can be the reason for tooth decaying problems of the kids in USA.
To conclude, the argument, which stands as of now, is considerably flawed. However, if more evidence is offered and answers to the above mentioned questions are provided then the argument can be evaluated.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-16 | AaronFernandes | 60 | view |
| 2023-04-09 | Aaishani De | 66 | view |
| 2023-01-18 | writingishard | 59 | view |
| 2022-06-24 | Nalu00 | 53 | view |
| 2021-08-27 | Adz12345 | 53 | view |
- Competition for high grades seriously limits the quality of learning at all levels of education.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In dev 50
- A recent study reported that pet owners have longer, healthier lives on average than do people who own no pets. Specifically, dog owners tend to have a lower incidence of heart disease. In light of these findings, Sherwood Hospital should form a partnersh 29
- "Over the past ten years, there has been a 20 percent decline in the size of the average audience at Classical Shakespeare Theatre productions. In spite of increased advertising, we are attracting fewer and fewer people to our shows, causing our prof 16
- The following recommendation appeared in a memo from the mayor of the town of Hopewell."Two years ago, the nearby town of Ocean View built a new municipal golf course and resort hotel. During the past two years, tourism in Ocean View has increased, n 82
- Students should always question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing a 50
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 362 350
No. of Characters: 1687 1500
No. of Different Words: 164 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.362 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.66 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.416 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 111 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 94 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 72 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 25 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.455 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.533 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.591 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.325 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.707 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.124 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 11 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 46, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ption: children living in the himalayan doesnt have where peopleof us has Himalayan ...
^^^^^^
Line 15, column 211, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...living in the Himalayan region of Nepal doesnt have any tooth problems and they wont c...
^^^^^^
Line 23, column 316, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...e assumption is true, then the argument doesnt hold water. Finally, do children e...
^^^^^^
Line 27, column 140, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...eties of chocolate whereas Nepal people doesnt have. If this true, then it can be the ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, whereas, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1766.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 358.0 441.139720559 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.93296089385 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34981470047 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48666899166 2.78398813304 89% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 204.123752495 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.45251396648 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 540.0 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 61.0426889688 57.8364921388 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.1111111111 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8888888889 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 11.0 5.15768463074 213% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.312807713509 0.218282227539 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0970589426959 0.0743258471296 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0803546830075 0.0701772020484 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124900016233 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0790980009045 0.0628817314937 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 98.500998004 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.