The following appeared in a business magazine As a result of numerous complaints of dizziness and nausea on the part of consumers of Promofoods tuna the company requested that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing Promofoods concluded tha

Essay topics:

The following appeared in a business magazine.

"As a result of numerous complaints of dizziness and nausea on the part of consumers of Promofoods tuna, the company requested that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing. Promofoods concluded that the canned tuna did not, after all, pose a health risk. This conclusion is based on tests performed on samples of the recalled cans by chemists from Promofoods; the chemists found that of the eight food chemicals most commonly blamed for causing symptoms of dizziness and nausea, five were not found in any of the tested cans. The chemists did find small amounts of the three remaining suspected chemicals but pointed out that these occur naturally in all canned foods."

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be addressed in order to decide whether the conclusion and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to the questions would help to evaluate the conclusion.

To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.

The business magazine states that even though a numerous complaints were filed regarding dizziness and nausea for Promofoods canned tuna, but the firm stated that the canned tuna didn't posses any health risk. The assertion made by Promofoods has many underlying assumption which needs to be substantiated.

Firstly, Promofoods requested the withdrawal of 8 million canned tuna and performed tests on these products, and finally deduced that there is no health risk involved with them. But, there is no evidence provided regarding the quality and vigilance through which these tests were undertaken. Moreover, there is no evidence regarding the sampling of the canned tuna, how samples were taken for these tests? Maybe the test were performed in a rash manner, or might not been undertaken in a disinterested way to save the company's reputation. Similarly, regarding the sampling of the products, there is no information on the criteria on sampling. Maybe the products in some specific climate or environmental conditions like temperature or moisture showed these harmful traits. Thus, the sampling should be carried out taking into account different factors for the study to be consistent. Therefore, there are a lot of assumptions regarding the study carried out by Promofoods which needs to be substantiated to hold any water.

Secondly, the chemists responsible for the study of the canned tuna at Promofoods stated that eight chemicals are responsible for dizziness and nausea. But, what is the validity of this assertion? Can we just plainly generalise the cause of uneasiness without taking into account the other environmental and health factors of the consumers. Maybe the dizziness and nausea in caused among the people already suffering from an underlying health condition like obesity or diabetes. Thus, this assumption regarding the generalisation by the chemists at Promofoods needs to supplied with more concrete evidence to be considered valid.

Lastly, even if we take into account the generalisation made by chemists regarding the dizziness and nausea causing chemicals, there is no evidence provided that three chemicals found, and they naturally occur in canned foods. If this is the case, then the other canned foods should also cause similar health problems. And, what is the amount or quantity in which these chemicals are existing in the canned foods? Maybe in other products these chemicals occurs in a very small quantity, but in Promofoods cans these restraints regarding quantity are breached. Therefore, there is an assumption undertaken by chemists that these chemicals naturally exists in can foods, but no proof regarding the quantity is provided.

Conclusively, there are a lot of underlying assumptions existing in the study undertaken by the chemists at Promofoods which need to be supported with evidence.

Votes
Average: 5.8 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 58, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'complaint'?
Suggestion: complaint
...zine states that even though a numerous complaints were filed regarding dizziness and naus...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 180, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...ut the firm stated that the canned tuna didnt posses any health risk. The assertion m...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 437, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a rash manner" with adverb for "rash"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...se tests? Maybe the test were performed in a rash manner, or might not been undertaken in a disi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 484, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a disinterested way" with adverb for "disinterested"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...sh manner, or might not been undertaken in a disinterested way to save the companys reputation. Simila...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, if, lastly, may, moreover, regarding, second, secondly, similarly, so, then, therefore, thus

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 28.8173652695 73% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 55.5748502994 115% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2410.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 444.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42792792793 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5903493882 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90921602192 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.443693693694 0.468620217663 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 745.2 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.67365269461 358% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.7651267585 57.8364921388 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.761904762 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1428571429 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.09523809524 5.70786347227 107% => 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 : 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: 0.254784801677 0.218282227539 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0792916619164 0.0743258471296 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0843549374374 0.0701772020484 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165292030258 0.128457276422 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0950621847412 0.0628817314937 151% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 12.5979740519 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 445 350
No. of Characters: 2351 1500
No. of Different Words: 185 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.593 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.283 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.848 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 176 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 141 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 119 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 77 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.19 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.076 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.332 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.524 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.123 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5