Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered.
The argument in itself lacks confidence, by first stating that cow flu can be used to save lives of many people if inoculations against the flu is routinely administered and then it contradicts the very same statement, in the last line by not permitting it routinely.
With respect to the statements provided about the areas affected by the disease, once the disease is detected in an area, the doctors must also check the probability of the extent to which it has affected a human body. And it will help us to know the number of times the inoculant has to be used to save a person. The last statement of the argument can be refuted on the basis that it does not provied any justified statements to give us the amount of inoculants used or tested on different patients of cow flu, that has saved their lives.
The other loop hole of the argument is that it does not give us the exact amount of deaths that are due to cow flu, and without having a proper supporting statement it just denies access of inoculations against cow flu. The deaths due to this disease may increase if the correct statistics are not provided. Hence we can nullify this argument.
The argument leaves a void for the readers to know about the number of saved lives as a result of inoculations. It does not give us a fact that proves, no one died when routinely check up was not provided in a specific affected area. This again weakens the point of the arguemnt to not provide routinely inoculations to the suffering people.
The above all arguments completely weakens the arguements and it does help the readers in any way to understand the topic properly and gian correct infoirmation form it.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 11 15
No. of Words: 299 350
No. of Characters: 1347 1500
No. of Different Words: 144 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.158 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.505 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.583 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 85 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 66 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 47 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 30 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.182 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.298 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.455 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.373 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.657 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.169 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... line by not permitting it routinely. With respect to the statements provided ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 221, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...access of inoculations against cow flu. The deaths due to this disease may increase...
^^^
Line 9, column 309, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...he correct statistics are not provided. Hence we can nullify this argument. The ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, hence, if, may, so, then, as to, as a result, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1389.0 2260.96107784 61% => OK
No of words: 299.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.64548494983 5.12650576532 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62957088 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 204.123752495 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.508361204013 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 705.55239521 63% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 19.7664670659 56% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.8050413771 57.8364921388 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.272727273 119.503703932 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1818181818 23.324526521 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.72727272727 5.70786347227 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.260374263701 0.218282227539 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0941029930318 0.0743258471296 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0642683543893 0.0701772020484 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137783008906 0.128457276422 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0734588067078 0.0628817314937 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.3550499002 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.197005988 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.99 12.5979740519 79% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 98.500998004 64% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
More content wanted.
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.