Frequent Government inspections in meat processing plants have resulted in lower levels of bacteria found in samples of processed chicken which subsequently will result in decrease in cases of stomach and intestinal infections throughout the country.
The author has immediately jumped to the above conclusion that seems to be coherent prima facie, but it lacks certain data that needs to be analyzed. Bacterial infection in processed chicken does largely depend on ways the chicken meat is processed, the hygienic values of men and machines working in the plant and the way it is stored.
Frequent government inspections may keep a check on the processing plants so that they follow an apt procedure to obtain the desired end product, in this case bacterial free processed meat.
The results of 50 percent decline in the amount of bacteria found in processed chicken substantiate the aforementioned statement.
But relating it to decline in gastroenterological infections is equivocal. Processed Chicken is relatively a smaller section of a vast meat processing industry. Moreover, there are numerous other factors like environment, water-contamination, hygiene etc that may lead to such infections. Thus, by only putting check to chicken processing industry the stomach and intestinal infections can be cut in half is an overstatement. Nonetheless, on the basis of only one year inspection, declaring Excel meat safe for the consumers seems like an endorsement. One just can’t declare products of several age old meat processing plants unsafe just by comparing it with one year average results.
Since the argument couldn’t substantiate with comprehensive facts and figures to determine the direct correlation with gastroenterological problems and chicken meat processing industry, it isn’t sound or convincing.
Votes
Essay reference notes: This topic is refereed from another essay topic, developed by user: ambarish55
Essay Categories
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'may', 'moreover', 'nonetheless', 'so', 'thus']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.308724832215 0.25644967241 120% => OK
Verbs: 0.154362416107 0.15541462614 99% => OK
Adjectives: 0.107382550336 0.0836205057962 128% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0369127516779 0.0520304965353 71% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0201342281879 0.0272364105082 74% => OK
Prepositions: 0.11744966443 0.125424944231 94% => OK
Participles: 0.0570469798658 0.0416121511921 137% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.34891404306 2.79052419416 120% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0268456375839 0.026700313972 101% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0805369127517 0.113004496875 71% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0134228187919 0.0255425247493 53% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0134228187919 0.0127820249294 105% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1822.0 2731.13054187 67% => OK
No of words: 276.0 446.07635468 62% => More words wanted.
Chars per words: 6.60144927536 6.12365571057 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.57801047555 89% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.43115942029 0.378187486979 114% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.376811594203 0.287650121315 131% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.268115942029 0.208842608468 128% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.202898550725 0.135150697306 150% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.34891404306 2.79052419416 120% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 207.018472906 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.586956521739 0.469332199767 125% => OK
Word variations: 62.0557690793 52.1807786196 119% => OK
How many sentences: 12.0 20.039408867 60% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.2022227129 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.9207010056 57.7814097925 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.833333333 141.986410481 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 23.2022227129 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.5 0.724660767414 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.58251231527 0% => OK
Readability: 60.6811594203 51.9672348444 117% => OK
Elegance: 2.28571428571 1.8405768891 124% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.436009411907 0.441005458295 99% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.099528429978 0.135418324435 73% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0580503952399 0.0829849096947 70% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.646040168519 0.58762219726 110% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.273791601004 0.147661913831 185% => Sentences are changing often in a paragraphs.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.184724896625 0.193483328276 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.142629939976 0.0970749176394 147% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.221002184828 0.42659136922 52% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.026306330468 0.0774707102158 34% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.281030657835 0.312017818177 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.13502211448 0.0698173142475 193% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.33743842365 60% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.87684729064 44% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 4.0 6.46551724138 62% => OK
Negative topic words: 1.0 5.36822660099 19% => More negative topic words wanted.
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 6.0 14.657635468 41% => More topic words wanted.
---------------------
More content wanted. For issue essays, around 450 words, for argument essays, around 400 words.
Rates: 50.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations to cover all aspects.