Benton City residents have adopted healthier lifestyles. A recent survey of city residents shows that the eating habits of city residents conform more closely to government nutritional recommendations than they did ten years ago. During those ten years, local sales of food products containing kiran, a substance that a scientific study has shown reduces cholesterol, have increased fourfold, while sales of sulia, a food rarely eaten by the healthiest residents, have declined dramatically. Because of these positive changes in the eating habits of Benton City residents, we predict that the obesity rate in the city will soon be well below the national average.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.
The argument stated above is faulty for numerous reasons. Essentially, the author rests the argument on foundationless assumptions that lead him to believe the study conducted and previously “unhealthy” lifestyles are accurate representations of the healthy trends seen today in Benton City. Concluding that Benton will illustrate a decline in obesity rates based on the prior stated assumptions is unreasonable.
Firstly, the arguer fails to provide evidence to support the study that was conducted by the city. To start, the argument does not mention what population was included in the sample size of the study. It may be that the researchers only subsumed households of those who made healthier eating choices in the first place. If the study ignored randomization of the population or did not encompass all of the residents of Benton, this could render the study unreliable since there is not sufficient data to claim that eating habits of all city residents resemble more closely to those of nutritional recommendations. On the other hand, if the author presented statistics and prove that demonstrated the study conducted included all citizens of Benton, the argument would hold to be more plausible. In either case, the argument still does not mention any specifics of the process of the survey conducted.
Continuing, the argument neglects to address other issues presented. Imagine there is a method to prove that the surveys taken were completely credible, it is still baseless to conclude obesity rates will decrease. What the author also implies is that all factors revolving around nutritional recommendations by the government in the past mirrors the ones of today. There is a possibility that ten years ago the nutritional recommendations set out by the government included a high sugar and fat diet. For this reasoning, the citizens could have chosen to not take part in such eating habits leading the arguer to believe the residents strayed away from recommendations. But this shows that not conforming to governmental recommendations does not necessarily mean the people of Benton were unhealthy eaters. However, if the author shed light on the nutritional recommendations ten years ago, the argument would prove to be more just. But even so, the types of eating habits in the past is not explained by the argument.
Lastly, the argument is built upon undescriptive statements. For example, the author states “Benton City residents have adopted healthier lifestyles.” But the other does not expand on their definition of “healthy.” It is possible that a “healthier lifestyle” for the arguer includes less consumption of pork based on personal religious beliefs. This argument would not hold up if it based on scientific facts. It cannot be guaranteed the meaning of healthier lifestyle so it cannot actually be concluded that the residents of Benton are eating healthier.
As a result of the various unwarranted assumptions made by the argument, the author fails to compile a compelling case to suggest that obesity rates will surely drop.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 488 350
No. of Characters: 2519 1500
No. of Different Words: 226 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.7 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.162 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.95 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 184 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 139 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 105 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 75 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.576 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.301 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.483 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.068 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 395, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... of the population or did not encompass all of the residents of Benton, this could render ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 556, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sidents of Benton are eating healthier. As a result of the various unwarranted a...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, may, so, still, even so, for example, as a result, in the first place, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2601.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 488.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32991803279 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10641071391 2.78398813304 112% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 204.123752495 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.479508196721 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 804.6 705.55239521 114% => 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: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.8877766125 57.8364921388 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.227272727 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1818181818 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.63636363636 5.70786347227 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.280346675015 0.218282227539 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0668100048828 0.0743258471296 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0767972725243 0.0701772020484 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.129554344816 0.128457276422 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.096114451325 0.0628817314937 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.3799401198 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.87 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 98.500998004 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.