A recently issued twenty-year study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia investigated the possible therapeutic effect of consuming salicylates. Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, food-processing companies also add salicylates to foods as preservatives. The twenty-year study found a correlation between the rise in the commercial use of salicylates and a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by study participants. At the time when the study concluded, food-processing companies had just discovered that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods, and, as a result, many companies plan to do so. Based on these study results, some health experts predict that residents of Mentia will suffer even fewer headaches in the future.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.
The author advocates that the residents of Mentia will suffer even less from headache cases in the future. The author has arrived at this conclusion due to increase use of Salicylates, the members of the same family as aspirin(a headache medicine), in packaged foods as preservatives and flavor additives. Quite convincing though such a statement appears at first glance, closer scrutiny reveals that argument lacks crucial support. Therefore, before this conclusion can be accepted, the below questions need to be answered.
Firstly, what is the authenticity of the mentioned study? In other words, how holistically this study has been conducted? For instance, it is possible that the people who are taken as subjects for the study were not suffering from headache problems before. It is also possible that the data has been deliberately faked to promote the use of salicylates in food products. The author has not provided any details about the study program like where it was conducted, under whose supervision or was there any government body involved or the research is funded by a private food processing company. Until the author provides further detail about the study, the drawn conclusion is significantly weakened.
Secondly, even if we assume that the study conducted is authentic, i.e salicylates do have soothing effects on people suffering from headaches, is there any actual correlation between the use of salicylates in commercial food products and the decline in headaches reported? It is possible that the people of Mentia do not consume packaged food products and rely only on organic food for their living. In that case, salicylates are naturally consumed not as preservatives. It is also possible that the commercial food people consumed is already rich in salicylates. If that is true, salicylates are not actually consumed as preservatives and the argument will only be partially true for a very small portion of commercial products. If any of the above is true, the argument does not hold water.
Lastly, is a large amount of salicylate safe for human consumption? The author has prematurely assumed that the more the amount of salicylate, the more the therapeutic effect. We all know that medicines should be consumed in a particular amount and overconsumption can result in several side effects and even the reverse. Therefore, maybe it is possible that using an additional amount of salicylates as a flavor additive is actually detrimental. Even if we assume that the quantity is safe, it is still possible that the effect of salicylates is limited and overconsumption will not have any effect. Therefore, the prediction of health experts that the number of headache cases will decline further is untenable.
To sum up, the argument as it stands now is flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to answer the above three questions and provide more concrete details then it might be possible to evaluate the viability of accepting the prediction.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-01 | Sophy@ | 57 | view |
| 2023-08-19 | Dinesh4518 | 64 | view |
| 2023-07-22 | jayauen | 72 | view |
| 2023-07-15 | Prasad002 | 58 | view |
| 2023-07-05 | ShirishBasnet1 | 50 | view |
- Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances times and places 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 50
- Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news During the same time period most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned with th 70
- Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts Write a response in which you d 58
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and supporting you 50
- Young people should be encouraged to pursue long term realistic goals rather than seek immediate fame and recognition Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for th 58
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 200, Rule ID: LESS_MORE_THEN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'than'?
Suggestion: than
...tions and provide more concrete details then it might be possible to evaluate the vi...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, firstly, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, for instance, in other words, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.6327345309 173% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2539.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 488.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20286885246 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94654674122 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.477459016393 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 833.4 705.55239521 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7421323864 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.791666667 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3333333333 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.58333333333 5.70786347227 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.269473514452 0.218282227539 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0718218452524 0.0743258471296 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.057467586576 0.0701772020484 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1325270623 0.128457276422 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0634576318456 0.0628817314937 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 12.88 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 98.500998004 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 200, Rule ID: LESS_MORE_THEN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'than'?
Suggestion: than
...tions and provide more concrete details then it might be possible to evaluate the vi...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, firstly, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, for instance, in other words, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.6327345309 173% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2539.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 488.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20286885246 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94654674122 2.78398813304 106% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.477459016393 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 833.4 705.55239521 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7421323864 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.791666667 119.503703932 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3333333333 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.58333333333 5.70786347227 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.269473514452 0.218282227539 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0718218452524 0.0743258471296 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.057467586576 0.0701772020484 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1325270623 0.128457276422 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0634576318456 0.0628817314937 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 12.88 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 98.500998004 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.