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 discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
In the summary of study on headaches the author refers to salicylates as a generally accepted treatment of headaches. According to the author, the number of headaches, suffered by the average resident of Mentia will decline in future due to the food companies using salicylates as preservatives and flavor additives to food. To substantiate his/her argument, the author cites a twenty-year-long study, found a correlation between the decline of headache reports and the commercial use of salicylates. While the argument might appear quite convincing at the first glance, the detail consideration reveals some logical flaws, rendering it unsubstantial.
First of all, the author unfairly assumes that the commercial salicylates are the same salicylates used to treat the headaches, without providing the reason for such assumption. It might be the case, that commercial salicylates are just a weaker version of the ones used in medicine, therefore, they might have no effect on the headache. Moreover, according to the author, many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, hoverer, he/she does not attribute the consumption of salicylate-rich food to the decline in headache reports. Therefore, it is hard to trace the influence of salicylates found in food, either naturally or artificially added, on the decline in headaches.
Next, the author assumes, that the population of Mentia remains unaltered during the twenty-year-long study. This assumption is contradictory to the common sense and it has no evidence that can support it. It might be the case that initially, the population of Mentia cosists of senior citizens, who were suffering of headaches quite offen. However, later, the population increased due to influx of younger people, and therefore, the percentage of the reported headaches declined. Without considering this option, it would be incorrect to attribute the correlation of decline in headache reports with commercial use of salicylates.
Finally, there is no evidence of other factors, contributed to the increase in well-being of the population of Mentia. It is possible, than twenty years ago the surrounding of the Mentia were polluted by dangerous chemical waste, produces by nearby factories, where most of the adult population of Mentia was employed. Definitely, these working conditions and environmental problems heavily affected the health situation in Mentia. However, later the government decided to evacuate factories to some other area, realizing this plan gradually in twenty years. As soon as environmental contamination levels started to decline, the number of headaches, reported by an average citizen of Mentia dropped down. Therefore, without ruling out some other factors it is impossible to convince me that salicylates are only responsible for the decline in headache reports.
In conclusion, to make the argument substantial the author should provide an evidence that there is no principal difference between commercial salicylates and the medical ones and both of them have the similar effects after treating the headaches. Moreover, I need the evidence that the foods are naturally rich in salicylates are not available in Mentia and has not been consumed during the study. Also, to get a general perspective of the situation, I need to know that some other external factors, like population change, external migration or reduction of the levels of pollution had insignificant influence during the study. Without this additional information the authors argument is unpersuasive and cannot convince me that it is due to commercial use of salicylates the number of headache reports declined in Mentia.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 23 15
No. of Words: 562 350
No. of Characters: 3015 1500
No. of Different Words: 249 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.869 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.365 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.059 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 244 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 196 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 147 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 106 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.435 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.316 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.522 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.322 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.514 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.09 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 136, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
...e population of Mentia. It is possible, than twenty years ago the surrounding of the...
^^^^
Line 9, column 671, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...Without this additional information the authors argument is unpersuasive and cannot con...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, well, while, in conclusion, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 92.0 55.5748502994 166% => OK
Nominalization: 32.0 16.3942115768 195% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3102.0 2260.96107784 137% => OK
No of words: 560.0 441.139720559 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53928571429 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.8645985582 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.13846283706 2.78398813304 113% => OK
Unique words: 262.0 204.123752495 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.467857142857 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 1007.1 705.55239521 143% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 13.0 4.22255489022 308% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.6824598909 57.8364921388 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.869565217 119.503703932 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.347826087 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.95652173913 5.70786347227 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.258136913564 0.218282227539 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0774784003977 0.0743258471296 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0652907513686 0.0701772020484 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153853317291 0.128457276422 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.064485305893 0.0628817314937 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 14.3799401198 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 48.3550499002 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.197005988 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.15 12.5979740519 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 155.0 98.500998004 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.