“People who use the artificial sweetener aspartame are better off consuming sugar, since aspartame can actually contribute to weight gain rather than weight loss. For example, high levels of aspartame have been shown to trigger a craving for food by depleting the brain of a chemical that registers satiety, or the sense of being full. Furthermore, studies suggest that sugars, if consumed after at least 45 minutes of continuous exercise, actually enhance the body’s ability to burn fat. Consequently, those who drink aspartame-sweetened juices after exercise will also lose this calorie-burning benefit. Thus it appears that people consuming aspartame rather than sugar are unlikely to achieve their dietary goals.”
The above argument claims that aspartame, the artificial sweetener, causes consumers to gain weight as it has been experienced that aspartame, in large amounts, induces ruining the chemical which is responsible for being full. Additionally, the experiments propose that consuming sugar after continued exercise enhances losing weight. Thus, this argument asserts that people who consume aspartame-sweetened drinks are deprived from this advantage of sugar. Consequently, the aspartame trigger to gain weight more than sugar. The conclusion of the argument relies on the assumption for which there is not lucid evidence. Hence, the argument is not convincing and has several loopholes.
First, the author claims that consuming sugar after the continued exercise speeds the weight loss process. It is not feasible to think that the opposite results will work for reverse products. The experiment does not demonstrate the impact of aspartame after the continued exercising. The artificial sweetener may show the same result as sugar. The author has simply skipped this line of reasoning. Hence, we can say that although the author's argument might be true, he should have collected more evidence in his favour.
Another point is about the author has mentioned the negative impact of aspartame in big doses and has not provided any sample of consuming the aspartame-sweetened products in normal doses. It is known that large doses of anything results in negative consequences. So it is logically incorrect to base the argument on the above mentioned assumption. There is no sufficient evidence to claim that the aspartame triggers obesity. Hence, it can be concluded that this argument is incomplete and deprived of enough study. Therefore, this conclusion is not very convincing
There is one more low point of this argument. According to the conclusion of this argument,
people who prefer artificial sweetener to sugar tend to gain weight more promptly. Nevertheless, the weight of man does depend simply on the consumption level of sugar, or aspartame. There are plenty of other factors affecting the weight of man: the lifestyle, the consumption degree of fast food or pastry and etc. The sugar consists of a small degree of da aily ration of an average man. So, the ignorance of other consumed factors questions the consequence of study itself. The author has overlooked all these factors, hence, the argument cannot be concluded on the basis of these statements.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. The author should take into consideration other features that impact the body of human beings. Moreover, one should analyse meticulously the results of study and interpret it correctly. Before any decision is made, all these things must be considered. In the end, we can say that this argument needs a detailed study of many other factors and the author should have provided a few proofs and data to establish this relationship
- People who use the artificial sweetener aspartame are better off consuming sugar since aspartame can actually contribute to weight gain rather than weight loss For example high levels of aspartame have been shown to trigger a craving for food by depleting 83
- The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:“Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best w 70
- “Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best way to get more people to read The Mercury is to reduce its price below that of The Bugle, at least un 50
- The following appeared in an announcement issued by the publisher of The Mercury, a weekly newspaper:“Since a competing lower-priced newspaper, The Bugle, was started five years ago, The Mercury’s circulation has declined by 10,000 readers. The best w 58
- Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. Other, however, think that changes is always a good thing. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 346, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ener may show the same result as sugar. The author has simply skipped this line of ...
^^^
Line 3, column 436, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ng. Hence, we can say that although the authors argument might be true, he should have ...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 567, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
..., this conclusion is not very convincing There is one more low point of this argu...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 92, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ding to the conclusion of this argument, people who prefer artificial sweetener t...
^^^
Line 8, column 308, Rule ID: AND_ETC[1]
Message: Use simply 'etc.'.
Suggestion: etc.
...nsumption degree of fast food or pastry and etc. The sugar consists of a small degree of...
^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['consequently', 'first', 'hence', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'moreover', 'nevertheless', 'so', 'therefore', 'thus', 'in conclusion']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.251893939394 0.25644967241 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.166666666667 0.15541462614 107% => OK
Adjectives: 0.092803030303 0.0836205057962 111% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0435606060606 0.0520304965353 84% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0208333333333 0.0272364105082 76% => OK
Prepositions: 0.11553030303 0.125424944231 92% => OK
Participles: 0.0492424242424 0.0416121511921 118% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.94858527755 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0170454545455 0.026700313972 64% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.123106060606 0.113004496875 109% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0227272727273 0.0255425247493 89% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0113636363636 0.0127820249294 89% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3008.0 2731.13054187 110% => OK
No of words: 474.0 446.07635468 106% => OK
Chars per words: 6.34599156118 6.12365571057 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66599839874 4.57801047555 102% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.415611814346 0.378187486979 110% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.295358649789 0.287650121315 103% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.244725738397 0.208842608468 117% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.166666666667 0.135150697306 123% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94858527755 2.79052419416 106% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 207.018472906 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.485232067511 0.469332199767 103% => OK
Word variations: 55.5184576885 52.1807786196 106% => OK
How many sentences: 29.0 20.039408867 145% => OK
Sentence length: 16.3448275862 23.2022227129 70% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.5454624487 57.7814097925 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.724137931 141.986410481 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.3448275862 23.2022227129 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.413793103448 0.724660767414 57% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 3.58251231527 140% => OK
Readability: 45.8806925651 51.9672348444 88% => OK
Elegance: 1.80327868852 1.8405768891 98% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.280954474078 0.441005458295 64% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.106156259894 0.135418324435 78% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0837876152678 0.0829849096947 101% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.524333569524 0.58762219726 89% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.153164532727 0.147661913831 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109562501054 0.193483328276 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0845258230039 0.0970749176394 87% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.429023465077 0.42659136922 101% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0937610402075 0.0774707102158 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183071923589 0.312017818177 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0847108224807 0.0698173142475 121% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.33743842365 48% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.87684729064 218% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.82512315271 207% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 3.0 6.46551724138 46% => OK
Negative topic words: 12.0 5.36822660099 224% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.82389162562 142% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 14.657635468 130% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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: This is not the final score. 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.