The following report appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council.
"An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where fish consumption is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. Clearly, eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. Since colds represent the most frequently given reason for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of Ichthaid—a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil—as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism."
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.
The writer of the newsletter has concluded that the absenteeism in schools and workplaces will significantly reduce if people use Ichthaid- a supplement derived from fish oil to prevent the cold. However, the author does not provide sufficient evidence to conclude that the daily use of Ichthaid will lead to prevention of cold which will subsequently result in higher attendance in schools and workplaces.
To suggest the method to prevent cold, the newsletter mentions the study reports of East Maria that suggests the higher fish consumption in the city. But, the study does not indicate the actual population of the city and what fraction of the population actually includes fish in their regular diet.Thus, the author needs to collect more detailed statistics related to fish consumption in the East Meria. Moreover, the study also states that the people of East Meria visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. This statement is clearly insubstantial as it relies on the assumptions that the people from the other region visit the doctor more frequently for the treatment of cold and all the individuals who are suffering from cold visit the doctor for treatment. However, there is no data about how many people visit the doctor in other cities. Also, the assuming all the people suffering from cold seeks medical attention is invalid as cold is a minor ailment that usually people don't even bother to see the doctor.
Secondly, the author claims that the primary reason for the absences from school and work is cold. To safely conclude that the author needs to provide the statistics of the reasons of people opting to take a leave. Even if the author provides the data for the reason of leave, we can not conclude that the major reason is cold as a lot of people lies on the paper to take a day to themselves.
Even if we believe that the major reason for absenteeism is cold and fish is helpful to prevent the cold, the claim that the use of Ichthaid will avoid the cold is insubstantial as we don't know if the particular nutritional supplement derived from the fish oil - Ichthaid is responsible for preventing cold. It is possible that even if the Ichthaid prevents cold, it is responsible for other health issues if taken on regular basis. The author needs to provide the lab results confirming the safety, and effectiveness of Ichthaid on cold to safely claim that the daily use of the substance will prevent the cold and subsequently lower absenteeism.
Thus, more evidence is required tho support the claim that the daily use of Ichthaid will reduce the problem of absenteeism in schools and offices.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 299, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Thus
...lly includes fish in their regular diet.Thus, the author needs to collect more detai...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1011, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... is a minor ailment that usually people dont even bother to see the doctor. Secon...
^^^^
Line 7, column 185, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...l avoid the cold is insubstantial as we dont know if the particular nutritional supp...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'thus']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.257796257796 0.25644967241 101% => OK
Verbs: 0.14553014553 0.15541462614 94% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0914760914761 0.0836205057962 109% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0561330561331 0.0520304965353 108% => OK
Pronouns: 0.016632016632 0.0272364105082 61% => OK
Prepositions: 0.143451143451 0.125424944231 114% => OK
Participles: 0.027027027027 0.0416121511921 65% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.62911590413 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Infinitives: 0.033264033264 0.026700313972 125% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.139293139293 0.113004496875 123% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.014553014553 0.0255425247493 57% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.012474012474 0.0127820249294 98% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2654.0 2731.13054187 97% => OK
No of words: 453.0 446.07635468 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.8587196468 6.12365571057 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61343653406 4.57801047555 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.33995584989 0.378187486979 90% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.238410596026 0.287650121315 83% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.165562913907 0.208842608468 79% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.105960264901 0.135150697306 78% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62911590413 2.79052419416 94% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 207.018472906 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.406181015453 0.469332199767 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 44.5039645694 52.1807786196 85% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 20.039408867 75% => OK
Sentence length: 30.2 23.2022227129 130% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.4869814586 57.7814097925 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 176.933333333 141.986410481 125% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.2 23.2022227129 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.666666666667 0.724660767414 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.58251231527 84% => OK
Readability: 54.0410596026 51.9672348444 104% => OK
Elegance: 1.9619047619 1.8405768891 107% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.445933777306 0.441005458295 101% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.273070709959 0.135418324435 202% => Sentence is so close to another sentence.
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.104981920288 0.0829849096947 127% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.751002555699 0.58762219726 128% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.140467787384 0.147661913831 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.262715872811 0.193483328276 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0932983382651 0.0970749176394 96% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.575631974535 0.42659136922 135% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0889874461384 0.0774707102158 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.343689243124 0.312017818177 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0623833468893 0.0698173142475 89% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.33743842365 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.87684729064 58% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.82512315271 104% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 6.46551724138 77% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 5.36822660099 75% => OK
Neutral topic words: 5.0 2.82389162562 177% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.