A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pets that had consumed the food experienced vomiting lethargy and other signs of illness After the recall the pet food company tested samples from the recalled food an

Essay topics:

A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pets that had consumed the food experienced vomiting, lethargy, and other signs of illness. After the recall, the pet food company tested samples from the recalled food and determined that all chemicals found in the food were chemicals that are approved for use in pet food. Thus, the recalled food was not responsible for these symptoms, and the company should not devote further resources to the investigation.
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 if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

The authors states that a pet food company has been bombarded with a lot of complaints about their product and in response, they have recalled 4 million pounds of pet food back. The author further states that these complaints are baseless since after their rigorous testing of these food item, they were found to be of viable quality and then proceeded to say to scrap off the investigation. The authorities conclusion seems to be based on three assumptions, which could potentially reduce the persuasiveness of his decision.

Firstly, the company authorities should conduct full-blown experiments and testing on the entire food components along with the packaging and the product as a whole. For instance there could be some chemical reaction between the food and the plastic packaging being used. The chemical reaction maybe increasing the expiry date of the food by maybe ten or twenty folds and lowering the food quality, which is leading to the deleterious effects such as vomiting and other maladies. Therefore, they need to conduct more research and inculcate more factors which could make the product viable to be eaten.

Secondly, they should consult more laboratories for conducting these experiments, maybe the pet food company is unable to identify the root cause of the issue because of lack of expertise in the subject. They could hire more veterans of the pet food industry and understand the underlying issue of the whole fiasco. For example, a outside consultant could look at the product testing phase with a disinterested look and come up with innovative solutions to solve the crisis. This way resorting to help could overcome this grave issue with effective results.

Lastly, there is no survey or research done as to where are the complaints, received from? The issue could be that different type of pets react differently to the food. Maybe the issue is with only certain species of pets. For instance, the only pets having illnesses and problems are dogs and puppies while the other pets are unaffected. In this case, maybe their product is not conducive for dogs and therefore, the result. So the decision made by the author does not hold water and relies on heavy usage of unreliable information.

Thus, the authorities need to conduct a systematic research about their pet food and understand the nitty-gritty of the matter and take into account all the assumptions listed. After all these parameters are evaluated then carefully, make a more prudent decision which will be viable for the company as well as the pet owners

Votes
Average: 5.7 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2023-04-07 Aaishani De 58 view
2022-09-30 Mufaddal Rangwala 58 view
2022-07-21 gewkimrtnabovwtejo 23 view
2022-07-20 gewkimrtnabovwtejo 58 view
2022-06-22 Nalu00 83 view
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 13, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'state'.
Suggestion: state
The authors states that a pet food company has been bombar...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 278, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this food' or 'these foods'?
Suggestion: this food; these foods
...s since after their rigorous testing of these food item, they were found to be of viable q...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 393, 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.
... to say to scrap off the investigation. The authorities conclusion seems to be base...
^^^
Line 1, column 397, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authorities'' or 'authority's'?
Suggestion: authorities'; authority's
...say to scrap off the investigation. The authorities conclusion seems to be based on three a...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 330, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...issue of the whole fiasco. For example, a outside consultant could look at the pr...
^
Line 13, column 39, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'systematic research'.
Suggestion: systematic research
... Thus, the authorities need to conduct a systematic research about their pet food and understand the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, lastly, look, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, well, while, after all, as to, for example, for instance, such as, as well as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2150.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 422.0 441.139720559 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09478672986 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53239876712 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67936451095 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.502369668246 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 659.7 705.55239521 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.476932592 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.157894737 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2105263158 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.47368421053 5.70786347227 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.336146288925 0.218282227539 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104165066532 0.0743258471296 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111786818423 0.0701772020484 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.197652757356 0.128457276422 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0538714035156 0.0628817314937 86% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 14.3799401198 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 98.500998004 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.

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: 19 15
No. of Words: 422 350
No. of Characters: 2090 1500
No. of Different Words: 211 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.532 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.953 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.601 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 112 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.211 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.613 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.305 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.54 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.079 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5