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.
In the report, the author avers that a new treatment using the nutrient named Ichthaid will prevent colds and the absence rates of schools and workplaces will be lower as a consequence. While the report mentions several points to buttress the main idea, they have specific logical fallacies. Therefore, without investigating these problems, the argument that the use of Ichthaid will be helpful to decrease absenteeism remains unreasonable.
To begin with, the relationship between fish consumption and the low level of visits to hospitals does not appear clearly in the writing. Although the writer assumes that the residents of East Meria seldom visit the doctor thanks to their high consumption of fish, there are no data corroborating this opinion. The inhabitants of this area may exercise a lot or eat a variety of dishes and their immune system might be strengthened as a result. It is also possible that specific food other than fish are decisive to prevent colds. It can be also supposed that the people of East Meria have specific habits good for their health. Given these various possibilities, it is not resonable to conclude that eating a large amount of fish help those people to prevent colds.
In addition, although the effect of fish can be proved, it is not certain that the use of Ichthaid would be helpful just because this material is extracted from fish. Unless there are the academic articles or the results of experiments substantiating the effect of Ichthaid, it cannot be concluded that this material is a key material of fish that protects people from colds. It is probable that other materials are germane to the effect of fish.
Thirdly, it is not clear whether the reason of absences is really colds. Although the people in West Meria mentioned their main reason of absences as colds, they might have other causes but just prevaricated that they have to get absence because of colds. Some of them might lie to have a day off, and some others might have other reasons that cannot be revealed, such as personal affairs related to their family members. Therefore, without further research, it is not explicit if prevention of colds would result in the lower rate of absence.
In conclusion, there are clear logical fallacies or the lack of information regarding the main argument of the article. To corroborate this opinion, the writer has to present more reliable data and proofs. Without more information, it is not possible to decide if the usage of a specific material will be helpful to reduce absenteeism.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 426 350
No. of Characters: 2071 1500
No. of Different Words: 200 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.543 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.862 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.602 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 153 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 113 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 74 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.421 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.652 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.684 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.311 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.373 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.087 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 2 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, really, regarding, so, then, therefore, third, thirdly, while, as to, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2123.0 2260.96107784 94% => OK
No of words: 426.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98356807512 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69060475807 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 204.123752495 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.481220657277 0.468620217663 103% => OK
syllable_count: 656.1 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.3022241094 57.8364921388 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.736842105 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4210526316 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.05263157895 5.70786347227 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0655482069079 0.218282227539 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0210018296595 0.0743258471296 28% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0308938586173 0.0701772020484 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0378629781849 0.128457276422 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0371094895864 0.0628817314937 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 98.500998004 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.