The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia.
"Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, for the past several decades, food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study. Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia."
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.
In this passage, the author cites the wider usage of salicylates in Mentia and predicts further decline in the number of headaches in this region. Quite reasonable though such recommendation appears at first glance, the author's reasoning of the argument is unconvincing due to several unsubstantiated assumptions which, if proven unwarranted, will seriously challenge the author's conclusion.
To start off, the author's reasoning heavily relies on the assumption that salicylates would have similar treatment effect as aspirin because of their similarity of chemical family. Based on the assumption the author therefore proposes that spreading of salicylates use could result in less headaches. However, such assumption is potentially problematic because the same chemical family mightn't be the dominant factors for treatment effect of salicylates. Nor do we know whether there exists several important distinctions between salicylates and aspirin in terms of chemical composition. Moreover, we have no idea about such variance in structures could impede with medical for curing headache. If it turns out that salicylates have different chemical structures compared with aspirin and such variances in structure determine its therapeutic effect, the author's proposition about salicylates's effectiveness is untenable.
Given that salicylates could be beneficial for treatment of headache, by stating that its rise in commercial usage could lead to decline of headache in Mentia, the author rules out other possibilities which could rival with the one alleged in the argument. However, we need to re-examine the assumption that food preservatives containing salicylates could actually be eaten by citizens and therefore contribute to their recovery or immunity for headache in advance. It is likely that people could seldom touch with salicylates in food preservatives during daily life, which make salicylates have nothing to do with people's health. Also, it is of equal probability that how much salicylates have been made out as flavor additives for foods and whether such products could be used in citizens' life. Moreover, we should also ask whether decline of headaches in referenced twenty-year study are actually out of citizens' personal exercises rather than their usage of salicylates products. If any of the aforementioned assumptions prove warranted, we are inclined to believe that rise of the commercial functionality of salicylates helps citizens increase their healthy status and gives rise to the dwindling of headaches.
Last but not least, while all of the assumptions mentioned above prove warranted, the author's recommendation is still unnecessary due to the efficiency of the statement concerning continual decline of headaches due to new use of salicylates. Claiming that prefigured continual drop of headaches coinciding with new salicylates use, the author seems too optimistic. It is unreasonable to assume that there will be no significant factors, which could greatly impact headache occurrence among citizens. Also, the author hastily comes to the conclusion that overall ameliorated status of citizens of Mentia in the future, but does not discuss whether citizens will suffer unexpected pressure that deteriorate their defense against headaches. If severe pandemics more likely resulting in headaches will outbrust in Mentia or citizens lead a sybarite daily life that further worsen their heathy status, then further decline of headaches in Mentia is still tenuous.
In summary, whether we should implement the author's recommendation heavily depends on the validity of the aforementioned assumptions. If those assumptions prove unwarranted, the author's recommendation could become little more than his/her wishful thinking and therefore we should consider whether or not the situation related with number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia will get improved in the future.
Comments
e-rater score 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: 21 15
No. of Words: 586 350
No. of Characters: 3295 1500
No. of Different Words: 268 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.92 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.623 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.042 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 268 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 216 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 165 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 113 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.905 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.094 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.355 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.553 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.199 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 373, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...warranted, will seriously challenge the authors conclusion. To start off, the author...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 286, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun headaches is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ding of salicylates use could result in less headaches. However, such assumption is ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 387, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: mightn't
...ematic because the same chemical family mightnt be the dominant factors for treatment e...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 674, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...so, it is of equal probability that how much salicylates have been made out as flavo...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1042, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rementioned assumptions prove warranted, we are inclined to believe that rise of ...
^^
Line 7, column 27, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...headaches. Last but not least, while all of the assumptions mentioned above prove warra...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 87, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ns mentioned above prove warranted, the authors recommendation is still unnecessary due...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 45, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ummary, whether we should implement the authors recommendation heavily depends on the v...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 179, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...hose assumptions prove unwarranted, the authors recommendation could become little more...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 290, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...inking and therefore we should consider whether or not the situation related with number of he...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, moreover, so, still, then, therefore, while, in summary, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.9520958084 154% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 88.0 55.5748502994 158% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3350.0 2260.96107784 148% => OK
No of words: 584.0 441.139720559 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.73630136986 5.12650576532 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.91590194646 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08091297672 2.78398813304 111% => OK
Unique words: 281.0 204.123752495 138% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.481164383562 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 1073.7 705.55239521 152% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.2918723063 57.8364921388 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.523809524 119.503703932 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8095238095 23.324526521 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.239221091852 0.218282227539 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0816438268645 0.0743258471296 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0396499784485 0.0701772020484 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129718113678 0.128457276422 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0500354426918 0.0628817314937 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.5 14.3799401198 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 48.3550499002 56% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 12.197005988 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.31 12.5979740519 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 159.0 98.500998004 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => 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.