Paleo diets, in which one eats how early hominids (human ancestors) did, are becoming increasingly popular. Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food, especially bone broth, a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours. They believe it has many health-promoting nutrients, such as cartilage, which can heal our joints, and chondroitin, which promotes nerve regeneration. Skeptics point out that ingested cartilage can’t replenish cartilage in your knees or elbows and ingested chondroitin doesn’t make our brains any healthier. Yet, there is strong anecdotal evidence that people who consume bone broth have fewer metabolic and inflammatory diseases than those who don’t. Therefore, ancient humans knew something about our physiology that we don’t, and that by emulating the way they ate, we can cure many chronic illnesses.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The author argues that we can cure chronic illnesses by emulating the way ancient humans ate. However, in order to better evaluate the validity of his conclusion, more information would be needed. Although he might be correct, because of the rife of assumptions and lack of evidence, his argument is flawed and unsubstantiated.
First, the author claims that our bodies evolved to eat kinds of food included in the paleo diet, mainly bone broth, which is rich in cartilage. However, he does not present good evidence that this is true. Are there studies confirming that eating cartilage, for example, can contribute to heal our joints? He says that the believers think that this is true, but he does not provide scientifical evidence to justify this point. Even if cartilage can really be helpful to our health, is the bone broth the only way to eat cartilage? Maybe other kinds of food that we eat everyday in the present also has good quantities of cartilage, and then we would not need to adopt the paleo diet.
Second, he states that ancient human knew something about physiology that the modern human does not know, which suggests that they used to have the paleo diet because they knew that it is helthier than others kinds of diets. However, can we say with sure that the ancient human ate cartilage because they had this knowledge? Not necessarily. Maybe they used to have such diet because it was the kind of food that was available at that time.
Third, he claims that the paleo diet can cure choronic illnesses, but he does not provide sufficient evidence to support his point. Again, to confirm this ideia we would need scientific studies proving that this is true. Also, the author assumes that by emulating the way our ancertors ate, we can cure the choronic ilnesses.
Besides that, to justify the adoption of the paleo diet, the studies should confirm that eating this kind of food is more effective to cure chronic illnesses than the methods that we already have, and also more effective than other kinds of diets.
In conclusion, because of many unwarranted assumptions, the author's argument is unpersuasive as it stands, and fails to make a convincing case that we can cure illnesses by imitating the way ancient humans ate.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | jason123 | 69 | view |
| 2020-01-25 | Chayank_11 | 57 | view |
| 2020-01-07 | hyunjulia99 | 75 | view |
| 2019-12-29 | neha1980 | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-13 | noitsimani | 61 | view |
- The following is a petition to the city council of Centerville:"Over the past three years, there has been a marked increase in cases of 'sidewalk rage,' similar to the irrational anger drivers experience on the road, but instead among sidewalk walkers. Th 63
- Paleo diets, in which one eats how early hominids (human ancestors) did, are becoming increasingly popular. Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food, especially bone broth, a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours. They 63
- Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader, it is not as important as a leader’s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree 75
- Science and technology will one day be able to solve all of society s problems Write a response to the prompt in which you discuss whether or not you agree or disagree Be certain to fully develop your position and carefully consider ways in which your pos 50
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 385 350
No. of Characters: 1810 1500
No. of Different Words: 165 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.43 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.701 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.399 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 114 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 90 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 55 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.389 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.644 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.778 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.344 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.586 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.169 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 571, Rule ID: EVERYDAY_EVERY_DAY[3]
Message: 'Everyday' is an adjective. Did you mean 'every day'?
Suggestion: every day
...? Maybe other kinds of food that we eat everyday in the present also has good quantities...
^^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 61, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...se of many unwarranted assumptions, the authors argument is unpersuasive as it stands, ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, may, really, second, so, then, third, for example, in conclusion, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 13.6137724551 169% => OK
Pronoun: 57.0 28.8173652695 198% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1884.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 385.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.89350649351 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4296068528 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49566194717 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.454545454545 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 575.1 705.55239521 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.2490712731 57.8364921388 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.823529412 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6470588235 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.64705882353 5.70786347227 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.157467924183 0.218282227539 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0553416283311 0.0743258471296 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0732145938699 0.0701772020484 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0750670287408 0.128457276422 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0689796388853 0.0628817314937 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.76 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 98.500998004 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.