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.
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 is flawed due to numerous reasons, they are as follows.
The argument claims that, due to small possibility of death from inoculation suggests, to not permit inoculations routinely. The statement itself explains that there is a small possibility of death. This possibility maybe very rare. It is possible that there is a huge difference between the number of deaths due to inoculation and the number of deaths due to not routine administeration of inocualtion against cow flu. Since the argument mentions that many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were rountinely administered to all people in the areas where the disease is detected. Which means there are many people dying due lack of routine admisteration of inoculation against the cow flu.
The small possibility of deaths due to inoculation might be due to the lack appropriate hygiene at the inoculation center. The argument fails to explain the reason of the small possibility of deaths due to inoculation. It is possible that the person might have died to some other reason and he/she happen to get the inoculation during the same time. More informaton about such cases would bolster the argument.
Although, there might be some adverse health effects of the inoculation on the human body. Hence, to monitor the health conditions of the person before and after the inoculation against cow flu would help understand the impact of the inoculation on the person. The impact maybe ephemeral and would not affect the person over long time. There might be very rare cases where the person's body is not suitable for such inoculations. Which showed the possibility of the death. Hence, a diagnostic blood, urine or other body parameter and the person's preexisting diseases infomation will help understand the sensitivity of person's body to process the incoculation.
In conclusion, there are multiple factors which were not considered while coming to the conclusion of the argument which weaken the argument. More factors such as ratio of deaths due to routine inoculation to deaths due to lack of routine inoculation would help us understand the validity of claim. The conditons when death occured due to routine inoculations, and how do they relate to the inoculation would help understand the deaths happended due to the inocualtion. Lastly, how can we reduce the small possibility of death due to inoculation which includes the body parameters check ups before and after the inoculation.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 402 350
No. of Characters: 2033 1500
No. of Different Words: 162 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.478 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.057 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.851 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 137 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.143 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.711 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.286 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.368 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.556 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.177 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 126, 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.
..., to not permit inoculations routinely. The statement itself explains that there is...
^^^
Line 5, column 599, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...he areas where the disease is detected. Which means there are many people dying due l...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 299, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'she' must be used with a third-person verb: 'happens'.
Suggestion: happens
...ve died to some other reason and he/she happen to get the inoculation during the same ...
^^^^^^
Line 13, column 1, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Although” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...cases would bolster the argument. Although, there might be some adverse health eff...
^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 430, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... is not suitable for such inoculations. Which showed the possibility of the death. He...
^^^^^
Line 17, column 626, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...k ups before and after the inoculation.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, if, lastly, may, so, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 16.3942115768 177% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2086.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 401.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20199501247 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47492842339 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90622247365 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.42144638404 0.468620217663 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 668.7 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.4664220738 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.3333333333 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0952380952 23.324526521 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.71428571429 5.70786347227 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 6.88822355289 189% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.345693316104 0.218282227539 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114276359682 0.0743258471296 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.118793512595 0.0701772020484 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181837444084 0.128457276422 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.14122864318 0.0628817314937 225% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.45 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.