A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal receive little to no professional dental care, while people in suburban areas in the United States see a dentist an average of 1.25 times per year. Thus, regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay.
In the recent study about the children living in the Himalayan region in Nepal and those living in suburban areas in the United States, it is stated that children who belong to the Himalayan mountain region have lower levels of tooth decay than the latter ones'. However, before the study indication is actually analyzed, the following unstated assumptios have to be considered.
To begin with, the author bases his argument only on a recent study (say, study duration of 2 years). For example, it might be possible that the Himalayan mountain children might have more tooth decays several years before than the US children. However, over the years, they might have practiced proper tooth care methods which helped them in reducing tooth decay to the maximum extent. If this assumption holds good, then the argument is significantly weakened.
To continue further, the author assumes that dental care implies only visiting a dentist. Maintaining healthy teeth can also be considered dental care. For example, It may be that the Himalayan children brush their teeth regularly twice a day in contrast with US children, who might brush only once a day. Further, the Himalayan children may not consume any food items that might lead to tooth decay. If any of the reasons mentioned above has merit, then the assumption does not hold water.
Further, the author concludes that regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay. Perhaps, the US children might be having very severe tooth decays and might have reduced to a greater extent ( though more tooth decays compared to Himalayan children) after proper dental care in form of drinking water regularly, brushing teeth, visiting dentist, and many others. This reason can seriously weaken the author's conclusion if the aforementioned assumption holds good.
In conclusion, as stated, the argument is considerably flawed due to its reliance on various unstated assumptions. If the author provides more evidence to the above assumptions (perhaps in the form of more research data) then it is more viable to analyze the author's recent study about the Himalayan children and the United States children.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-16 | AaronFernandes | 60 | view |
| 2023-04-09 | Aaishani De | 66 | view |
| 2023-01-18 | writingishard | 59 | view |
| 2022-06-24 | Nalu00 | 53 | view |
| 2021-08-27 | Adz12345 | 53 | view |
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 75
- According to a recent report by our marketing department during the past year fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies than in any other year And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actual 58
- We learn our most valuable lessons in life from struggling with our limitations rather than from enjoying our successes 66
- Mass media and the internet have caused people s attention spans to get shorter However the overall effect has been positive while people are less able to focus on one thing they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through large quan 62
- A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal rec 60
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 10 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 349 350
No. of Characters: 1761 1500
No. of Different Words: 163 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.322 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.046 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.447 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 135 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 93 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 30 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.812 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.075 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.352 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.568 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.122 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ated assumptios have to be considered. To begin with, the author bases his argu...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he argument is significantly weakened. To continue further, the author assumes ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...en the assumption does not hold water. Further, the author concludes that regul...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 213, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d might have reduced to a greater extent though more tooth decays compared to Him...
^^
Line 4, column 421, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...s. This reason can seriously weaken the authors conclusion if the aforementioned assump...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... aforementioned assumption holds good. In conclusion, as stated, the argument i...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 226, Rule ID: LESS_MORE_THEN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'than'?
Suggestion: than
...rhaps in the form of more research data then it is more viable to analyze the author...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, however, if, may, so, then, for example, in conclusion, in contrast, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1806.0 2260.96107784 80% => OK
No of words: 349.0 441.139720559 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.17478510029 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51616395046 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.504297994269 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 705.55239521 79% => 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: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.3905306414 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.875 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8125 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.125 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
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: 0.377191634842 0.218282227539 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113463509246 0.0743258471296 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.171639424844 0.0701772020484 245% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.244690837919 0.128457276422 190% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.195493928272 0.0628817314937 311% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.