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.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The given paragraph of information on paleo diets fails to convince us of its credibility. It is based on the critically flawed assumption that ancient and modern humans are fundamentally the same and thus will benefit from the same diet.
As mentioned in the argument, Proponents refer to "these types" of food in favour of the Paleo Diet. This is inherently flawed as it gives us no information regarding the source of the foods, the nutrients they provide or even their availability today. It’s absurd to assume that all plant or animal based food that was derived by the early humans will be available today. The single example given of the bone broth further weakens the argument. Cooking of the bone for several hours specifies no method of cooking. If, for example, they were to be grilled instead of boiled to bring out the benefits, they might turn out to be more harmful without the proper techniques. Even if we have the information about the these said types of foods, be able to obtain them, and prepare them appropriately there is no evidence that proves they will benefit us in the same way as our ancestors. The argument cites strong anecdotal evidence to strengthen the argument in favour of the Paleo diet. However, there is no evidence that validates the credibility of these anecdotes. A story passed across generations is bound to have some of its facts glorified for the sake of storytelling, thus not accounting for its scientific validity. Moreover, there may be some aspects of the anecdotes that may be missing or modified, as the story progresses from mind to mind. To base an entire diet change on mere anecdotal evidence is absurd and invalid.
Despite all these inconsistencies, the biggest flaw of the argument is the lack of evidence that it provides in reference to the ancient humans. As humans have evolved, their physical and mental activities, their living conditions and their energy profiles have changed drastically. The same foods that were probably chosen for their high energy content in ancient times, may prove to be detrimental to the health of modern humans, leading to even obesity and other related disorders. Moreover, Modern humans may or may not have developed the immunity required to benefit from the diet, thus actually acting counterproductive.
The foundation laid by this argument is weak, and baseless. It calls for a deep insight into the differences between ancient and modern humans, and proven scientific evidence to back itself.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-23 | Ruhani | 59 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Mayuresh08 | 70 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Akash Konar | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | fabjaved | 62 | view |
| 2023-07-16 | hello_kratnesh101 | 47 | view |
- 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 59
- Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader it is not as important as a leader s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree wi 58
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 416 350
No. of Characters: 2032 1500
No. of Different Words: 208 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.516 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.885 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.653 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 145 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 105 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 70 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.8 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.414 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.45 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.288 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.449 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.057 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... thus will benefit from the same diet. As mentioned in the argument, Proponents...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, thus, for example, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2101.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 416.0 441.139720559 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.05048076923 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51620172871 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78557128063 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509615384615 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 673.2 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.9681583672 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.05 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.65 5.70786347227 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.15599439196 0.218282227539 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0502224176061 0.0743258471296 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.045289811802 0.0701772020484 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0764227394385 0.128457276422 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0589779845361 0.0628817314937 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.01 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 98.500998004 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.