Allergies are an overreaction of the immune system to certain stimuli. One view is that allergies can develop as the result of childhood exposure to certain irritants, such as dust or animal dander, while the immune system is not yet mature. Another view is that exposure to particular bacteria early in childhood actually triggers the proper development of the immune system, and that limiting exposure to these bacteria through excessive hygiene can cause children's immune systems to overreact to certain irritants later on. A new study supports the second view: children who are washed especially frequently and whose parents clean their homes especially frequently are more likely to develop allergies than are other children. So in order to reduce the incidence of allergies in children and adults, parents should not limit children's exposure to irritants or bacteria.
The given argument discusses two views related to the development of allergies. The first is that exposure to certain irritants like dust or animal dander during childhood can lead to allergies since the body's immune system is not fully developed in children. The second view is that the development of the immune system is activated by exposure to certain types of bacteria in childhood. The arguer cites the results of a new study and claims that they support the second view. The conclusion derived by the author might appear logical and convincing at first glance. However, a more critical analysis of the justification supplied by the author has highlighted many questions. Therefore, the premises in their current form are not cogent and the argument is rife with unwarranted assumptions which make it more susceptible to attacks.
On the first facet, the author of the argument has not mentioned about the demographic region in which the study has been conducted. Maybe the study has been conducted in the area prone to allergies. Moreover, he has not provided the evidence for the study that has been conducted and it raises some questions. How many families were the subject for the study? He has also not mentioned about other factors that could have triggered allergies in the child. Maybe their homes situated in the places which are unhygienic and cleaning children and houses is not sufficient.
Secondly, the author has failed to examine the facts that what were the types of allergy that children encountered. It is likely that the allergies are genetic and they are having allergy because their parents have it or their grandparents had it. Moreover, allergies are developed from eating habits or using a certain kind of cosmetics or soap it's not just that cleaning children and house will be enough for avoiding allergies.
Additionally, there are other factors that develop allergies. Eating habits, playing habits and the environment in which you are. If a child is playing in mud then he is more likely to have an allergy than other who does not. If other child is having a certain allergy than it might transmit to other children with whom he/she is playing. Moreover, cleaning does not mean that you have successfully avoided the trouble of allergy until you do not clean with disinfectants. The children usually caught up the allergy by the bacterias and the irritants which are present in the environment despite cleaning.
In the crux, the author's argument is based on unsubstantiated presumptions. The author should have reinforced his argument with more evidence to make the case more convincing. However, the author failed to examine facts that there might be several other factors that could trigger an allergy in children and naively concluded, thereby rendering the argument indefensible.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 25 15
No. of Words: 464 350
No. of Characters: 2319 1500
No. of Different Words: 202 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.641 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.998 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.614 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 170 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 131 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 53 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.56 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.113 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.291 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.506 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.159 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 261, 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.
...tem is not fully developed in children. The second view is that the development of ...
^^^
Line 1, column 390, 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.
...certain types of bacteria in childhood. The arguer cites the results of a new study...
^^^
Line 1, column 480, 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.
...aims that they support the second view. The conclusion derived by the author might ...
^^^
Line 8, column 131, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...s and the environment in which you are. If a child is playing in mud then he is mo...
^^
Line 8, column 227, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ave an allergy than other who does not. If other child is having a certain allergy...
^^
Line 10, column 18, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...t despite cleaning. In the crux, the authors argument is based on unsubstantiated pr...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2372.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 463.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12311015119 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63868890866 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70896236812 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 204.123752495 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.453563714903 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 735.3 705.55239521 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.4995679975 57.8364921388 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.88 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.52 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.48 5.70786347227 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223032145837 0.218282227539 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0625653358014 0.0743258471296 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100533897184 0.0701772020484 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122759604858 0.128457276422 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114474879298 0.0628817314937 182% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 98.500998004 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.