Paleo diets, in which one eats how early hominids (human ancestors) did, are becoming increasingly popular. Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food, especially bone broth, a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours. They believe it has many health-promoting nutrients, such as cartilage, which can heal our joints, and chondroitin, which promotes nerve regeneration. Skeptics point out that ingested cartilage can’t replenish cartilage in your knees or elbows and ingested chondroitin doesn’t make our brains any healthier. Yet, there is strong anecdotal evidence that people who consume bone broth have fewer metabolic and inflammatory diseases than those who don’t. Therefore, ancient humans knew something about our physiology that we don’t, and that by emulating the way they ate, we can cure many chronic illnesses.
The author of the passage claims that ancient humans knew secrets about the human body that modern people are unaware of. He infers that by using these secrets, and by emulating their ways, many chronic illnesses can be cured.
While the author makes several points to support his stand, there are many loopholes in the conclusion that mimicking the hominid way of eating, or adopting paleo diets, have great benefits or illness curing capabilities.
Firstly, the lack of metabolic and inflammatory diseases in those who consume bone broth as compared to those who don't may merely be a correlation confused for causation. Humans have always shown inclination to create causation where they want to believe a certain thing to be true. The simple logic that cartilage replenishes cartilage is very attractive. Another instance of an account being correlation and not causation is people believing the vaccinations given to children cause autism in them. While the consequences of this misconception is much more precarious than the one mentioned in the passage, it is caused cause by similar kind of anecdotal evidence.
This also attributes to the dangers of statistical analysis. With limited data, relations between any two things can be found. To confirm these, the data has to be in very large numbers and has to be backed by scientific evidence.
Furthermore, there is a massive time lapse between the era when the hominids lived and the present. If we, for the purpose of the argument, assume that the hominids where capable of what they were presumed to, humans now have come a long way of evolving from hominids. What may have had a certain effect on the human body may not have the same effect on it at present. A classic evidence of this happening is the appendix being a vestigial organ. While the appendix may have been useful to the humans in the ancient times to digest grass and other foods of the sort, we do not require it anymore due to the dietary changes of the humans. Many people have also developed intolerance to several foods that were once prominent sources of nutrients. Hence, even if the diet worked in the past, it is not necessary it will work today.
In conclusion, while the authors inference may be true to some extent, there isn't enough evidence that these diets have the same effect on modern human physiology.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | jason123 | 69 | view |
| 2020-01-25 | Chayank_11 | 57 | view |
| 2020-01-07 | hyunjulia99 | 75 | view |
| 2019-12-29 | neha1980 | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-13 | noitsimani | 61 | view |
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 401 350
No. of Characters: 1905 1500
No. of Different Words: 224 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.475 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.751 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.517 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 133 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 99 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 60 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.105 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.953 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.579 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.272 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.539 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.072 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 115, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ume bone broth as compared to those who dont may merely be a correlation confused fo...
^^^^
Line 15, column 64, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... massive time lapse between the era when the hominids lived and the present. If w...
^^
Line 19, column 26, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rk today. In conclusion, while the authors inference may be true to some extent, t...
^^^^^^^
Line 19, column 78, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...rence may be true to some extent, there isnt enough evidence that these diets have t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, if, may, so, while, as to, in conclusion, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1969.0 2260.96107784 87% => OK
No of words: 399.0 441.139720559 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.93483709273 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46933824581 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58002734523 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 204.123752495 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.568922305764 0.468620217663 121% => OK
syllable_count: 638.1 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.6622908235 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.631578947 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05263157895 5.70786347227 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.121880992809 0.218282227539 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0326253353262 0.0743258471296 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0302446915886 0.0701772020484 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0585854105634 0.128457276422 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.025532950492 0.0628817314937 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 98.500998004 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.