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 council of West Meria Public Health is concluding that eating Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil will prevent colds and hence, lower the absentees from schools and workplaces. They provide evidence such as a report from East Meria where consumption of fish is higher than the West and therefore, doctor visits are very few. The evidence the council provides is flawed and ineffective and requires the following evidence to validate it.
First, we need evidence that the people who eat fish are the ones that stay healthy. Maybe the people in the East are just stronger because they exercise more hence, they have a stronger immune system. Or maybe, they treat their colds at home and do not visit the doctor at all. Once the council provides evidence that doctor visits are mainly due to colds, their argument does not hold water.
Secondly, evidence is needed to support the claim that everyone who will eat the nutritional supplement, will not be allergic to it. Perhaps the people that allergic and do not eat fish in the East are staying healthy by eating more vitamins, minerals, and a balanced diet. Or perhaps, the people who do eat fish also eat a balanced meal and other nutrients that keeps them fit. If this evidence is provided, it will give more value to the argument the author is making.
Furthermore, the author is assuming that all the absentees from school and work are due to colds and evidence to counteract that is required. Maybe the students and workers who are absent are due to a family member who is sick and must be looked after. An excuse of absence could also be due to other health issues and not necessarily a cold. Providing these details will allow the author’s argument to be more valid.
The argument as it stands now is flawed. More evidence is required to appeal to the public and the facilities in charge of including Ichthaid in lunches at schools and workplaces. The evidence provided will help evaluate the argument more effectively.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 345 350
No. of Characters: 1620 1500
No. of Different Words: 161 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.31 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.696 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.371 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 116 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 80 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 61 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 21 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.167 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.63 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.322 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.517 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.109 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, hence, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 55.5748502994 52% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1670.0 2260.96107784 74% => OK
No of words: 345.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.84057971014 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3097767484 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4603454487 2.78398813304 88% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 204.123752495 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.478260869565 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.8073118266 57.8364921388 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.7777777778 119.503703932 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1666666667 23.324526521 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.88888888889 5.70786347227 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0953188650625 0.218282227539 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0310545250668 0.0743258471296 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0426339125109 0.0701772020484 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0590207679628 0.128457276422 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0625504101295 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 12.5979740519 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.83 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 98.500998004 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.