The following appeared in a business magazine.
"As a result of numerous complaints of dizziness and nausea on the part of consumers of Promofoods tuna, the company requested that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing. Promofoods concluded that the canned tuna did not, after all, pose a health risk. This conclusion is based on tests performed on samples of the recalled cans by chemists from Promofoods; the chemists found that of the eight food chemicals most commonly blamed for causing symptoms of dizziness and nausea, five were not found in any of the tested cans. The chemists did find small amounts of the three remaining suspected chemicals but pointed out that these occur naturally in all canned foods."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be addressed in order to decide whether the conclusion and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to the questions would help to evaluate the conclusion.
The conclusion arrived at by Promofoods that their canned tuna did not pose any health risk is sceptical. they supported the conclusion with the result from the test performed on samples of recalled canned foods by their chemists. However, there are about three questions that need to be answered in order to decide whether the conclusion and the arguments that it depends on are logical.
Firstly, where are the eight million cans returned for testing coming from? Perhaps, the company managed to recall the eight million cans from a particular region where the complaint of dizziness and nausea are very low. It is also possible that the eight million cans were not from the production batch that is the culprit of the problem. If any of the above cases is true, the conclusion will be flawed. Providing an answer to the question will help to evaluate the argument and clear any doubt from anyone with this line of reasoning.
Secondly, are there possibilities of other possible causes of nausea and dizziness apart from the common causes in the cans tested? The argument only presented results for testing the most common causes of the symptoms of dizziness and nausea, without testing the presence of other possible causes. Perhaps, the cause of these effects on the consumers is a chemical that is not among the common causes but is also a viable known cause. Maybe a new chemical that the chemists are not aware of is recently causing the issues. If we have any of the above cases to be true, the argument will hold no water. Providing an answer to this question will preclude the possibility of using the above point to counter their conclusion in the future.
Thirdly, what is the level of sincerity on the part of the chemists? It is very possible that the chemists are from the research and development section of the company and are the ones that recommended the "improvement" that is currently causing the chaos(they will likely lie to protect their jobs). It is also possible that the company intimidated them to present the current result of the test. If any of the scenarios is true, then the conclusion will be based on fabrications. Answering the question will help to improve the credibility of the report provided.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for failing to address the following questions raised above. The company needs to come up with better evidence and also answer the three questions accurately to make its position a stronger one.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-10-31 | raghavchauhan619 | 58 | view |
| 2022-07-27 | joe12 | 58 | view |
| 2022-07-12 | Soumyadip Kar | 60 | view |
| 2022-06-30 | sefeliz | 55 | view |
| 2021-09-25 | miqbalhilmi | 59 | view |
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 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 and supporti 66
- The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment 66
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bacter 55
- The powerful are most respected not when they exercise their power but when they refrain from exercising it Write an essay in which you develop and support a position on the statement above In writing your essay you should consider both when the statement 50
- The powerful are most respected not when they exercise their power but when they refrain from exercising it Write an essay in which you develop and support a position on the statement above In writing your essay you should consider both when the statement 16
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 421 350
No. of Characters: 2007 1500
No. of Different Words: 185 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.53 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.767 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.48 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 109 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 73 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.05 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.365 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.425 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.11 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 3 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 107, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: They
... not pose any health risk is sceptical. they supported the conclusion with the resul...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, apart from, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2063.0 2260.96107784 91% => OK
No of words: 421.0 441.139720559 95% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90023752969 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52971130743 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67347027506 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 204.123752495 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.456057007126 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 642.6 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => 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: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.945370859 57.8364921388 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.2380952381 119.503703932 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0476190476 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.42857142857 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
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: 0.212781153371 0.218282227539 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0651759807096 0.0743258471296 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0621378880536 0.0701772020484 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112826684568 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0447684818896 0.0628817314937 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 12.5979740519 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 98.500998004 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.