1. In 1992, many farmers in Jalikistan began using a hormone designed to produce larger cows that would produce more milk. Since then, childhood obesity in Jalikistan has grown by 200 percent. The amount of milk and dairy consumed by children in this area has not increased or decreased. Children in the same area who are lactose intolerant, and who drink almond milk or soy milk, have not had the same increase in childhood obesity. The only clear explanation is that the introduction of the hormone is responsible for the increase in childhood obesity in that area.
Write a response in which you discuss one or more viable alternatives to the proposed explanation. Justify, with support, why the alternatives could rival the proposed explanation and explain how those explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
Childhood obesity in Jalikstan has exploded in the past two decades. This shift began around the same time that farmers in Jalikstan began using a hormone to make their cows more productive. However, the author of this argument argues that the introduction of the hormone into the cow population is the direct and only cause of the increase of childhood obesity. Though it is possible that this hormone has played a role in increasing childhood obesity, this argument does not take into account other factors; nor does this writer produce coherent evidence for the claims it makes regarding lactose intolerant children in the area.
First of all, the writer does not divulge the source of his knowledge regarding the dairy consumption in this area. Possibly he has looked at the rate of dairy purchases by households with young children or has polled parents to see how much their children consume, but both of these methods would be flawed; the data collected could be inaccurate, or parents could be dishonest for a number of reasons. The writer also does not say how long he has been collecting information for. Nor does he explain how he has eliminated other possible factors, like a rise in carbohydrate- or sugar-heavy snacks, or if the sizes of school lunches have changed.
Furthermore, the author does not give any evidence proving his claim that lactose intolerant children have not had such rates of obesity. Is it not possible that these children have more limited diets overall and therefore have fewer calories on average every day? Almond and soy milk often have fewer calories than whole milk; this is just one of many ways in which being lactose intolerant could reduce one’s daily calorie count.
The language used in this argument is particularly vague. The writer is unclear about what he means when he refers “children in the same area” who are lactose intolerant and have not suffered from obesity. The area he refers to could be one square mile or fifty. He also weakens his own argument by failing to show that the timing of increased childhood obesity coincided exactly with the hormone. He links a general trend to a specific occurrence, but he should remember that correlation does not equal causation.
While the idea that this growth hormone caused childhood obesity is worthy of exploration, this author needs to broaden his argument. Though it is tempting to choose one perpetrator of an issue like childhood obesity, the author should try to understand that the health issues of a large population likely will have a spectrum of causes, and the introduction of this growth hormone was probably part of a wave through the meat industry that deserves critique in its own right.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 456 350
No. of Characters: 2212 1500
No. of Different Words: 234 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.621 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.851 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.484 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 160 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 121 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 43 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.94 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.611 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.329 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.57 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.17 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 102, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nowledge regarding the dairy consumption in this area. Possibly he has looked at ...
^^
Line 7, column 154, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...s 'children in the same area' who are lactose intolerant and have not suffere...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 217, 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.
...ant and have not suffered from obesity. The area he refers to could be one square m...
^^^
Line 9, column 451, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to critique'
Suggestion: to critique
...through the meat industry that deserves critique in its own right.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, look, regarding, so, therefore, while, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2279.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 456.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99780701754 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62105577807 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60749856103 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.521929824561 0.468620217663 111% => OK
syllable_count: 723.6 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.2648083172 57.8364921388 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.611111111 119.503703932 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.3333333333 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.27777777778 5.70786347227 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.188218812806 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0626198835514 0.0743258471296 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0505672841937 0.0701772020484 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1038465298 0.128457276422 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0627535092263 0.0628817314937 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 98.500998004 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.