Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The argument states that inoculations against cow flu cannot be routinely administered since there is a small possibility of a person dying because of it. This argument should be evaluated in detail with the help of additional evidence in order to establish its veracity.
Firstly, the very small possibility of death due to inoculation should be quantified. It can be possible that the number is so low that is is almost unfeasible for the death to actually occur. There is a possibility of death in undertaking several routine things like taking a flight, swimming in the ocean, going for camping etc. But the quantification of this possibility helps us in better understanding just how dangerous a particular thing is. It is also possible that in a cow flu detected area, the possibility of a person dying from disease might be much higher than the possibility of dying from the inoculation. In such a scenario, the argument will be severely weakened since it is always better to choose the less dangerous option than to do nothing at all. Data regarding the possible deaths in case of cow flu breakout and possible deaths due to inoculation is required to get a realistic idea on whether the decision to not administer inoculation is a wise decision. In case the cow flu epidemic is emerging as a bigger threat to lives than inoculation then the argument is severely weakened.
Secondly, evidence is required on whether there are other factors which contribute to the possibility of death as result of inoculation. Data is required to ascertain whether inoculation acts as an independent variable or are there other dependent variables which are giving rise to the lethal nature being ascribed to the inoculation. There can be other factors like hygiene while administering the inoculation, possible allergies, or inordinate amount of the medicine which is causing the possibility of death. These options have to be explored. If no such evidence is found then the argument is strengthened somewhat that the cow flu inoculation does, in fact, pose a threat to life.
Information regarding a possible antidote or ameliorating drug is also required. If there is a medicine or vaccine which coupled with the inoculation can nullify its life threatening qualities then the inoculation can still be permitted to be administered. Any evidence in this direction severely weakens the argument.
Therefore, the argument presented should be evaluated further on the basis of strong evidence and data which quantifies the possibility of death by inoculation, a comparison of possible deaths, other factors contributing to the death by inoculations and possible methods in which to further decrease or eliminate the threat imposed by the cow flu inoculation. After this evidence only can the argument be well discussed and concluded.
- TPO-14 - Integrated Writing Task Every year, forest fires and severe stormscause a great deal of damage to forests in the northwestern United States. One way of dealing with the aftermath of these disasters is called salvage logging, which is the practice 90
- TPO-02 - Integrated Writing Task In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team. Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages. First of all, a group of people 82
- TPO-46 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?The opinions of celebrities, such as famous entertainers and athletes, are more important to younger people than they are to older people.Use specific reasons and exam 73
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 75
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of student housing at Buckingham College."To serve the housing needs of our students, Buckingham College should build a number of new dormitories. Buckingham's enrollment is growing and, based on current 71
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 459 350
No. of Characters: 2330 1500
No. of Different Words: 201 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.629 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.076 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.013 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 174 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 142 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 117 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.158 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.591 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.343 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.531 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.074 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 137, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: is
...possible that the number is so low that is is almost unfeasible for the death to actu...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, well, while, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 19.6327345309 178% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 31.0 16.3942115768 189% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2378.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 459.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18082788671 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62863751936 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07609379508 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 204.123752495 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.450980392157 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 792.9 705.55239521 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.5014629471 57.8364921388 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.9 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.95 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.9 5.70786347227 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.275655857274 0.218282227539 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0939571842402 0.0743258471296 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0935608313643 0.0701772020484 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167546049892 0.128457276422 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0847559647922 0.0628817314937 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 12.3882235529 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.