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 argument presented above draws the conclusion that inoculations cannot be routinely administered due to the slight possibility of death. However, it is wanting in the quantity of evidences provided in order to draw the given conclusion.
The given passage suggests that administering the vaccine in areas where cow flu is detected shall help curb the disease. However, it gives no evidence on how the disease spreads and how long does it take for the symptoms to appear. The virus might spread quickly among people and remain dormant until some factors catalyze it to harm the body. In such cases, administering the vaccine after the disease has been detected in some people might prove of no use to the population.
Also, the argument vaguely suggests that there is a 'small possibility' that the patient might die due to the administered vaccine. However, it does not delineate the cause of the death. Will the death be caused due to the overdose of the medicine in the vaccine? Have some deaths been caused due to an unsuspected immunity attack by the patient's body on the administered vaccine? The reasons for death could be copious.
A death due to overdose could be prevented by carefully regulating the amount of medicine administered as per the age, the gender or other factors of the patient. Whereas if immunity attacks have been observed in some patients, certain medical tests prior to vaccination could prevent such fallacies. There is a need to study the deaths due to inoculations against cow flu in detail and sufficient evidence needs to be provided to draw an appropriate conclusion.
Also, the conclusion states that the inoculations cannot be routinely administered. However, it does not provide details on how often the vaccinations should be given. If further evidence was available such as the amount of medicine administered to the patients and the time period for which the effects of the vaccine lasts, a stronger conclusion can be derived.
Hence, the above passages describe the necessity of stronger evidences that are required to fathom the implications of administering the vaccine which could aid in deriving a sound conclusion regarding the same.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 358 350
No. of Characters: 1791 1500
No. of Different Words: 167 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.35 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.003 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.804 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 129 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 108 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 71 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 41 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.889 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.967 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.331 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.598 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.071 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 154, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...light possibility of death. However, it is wanting in the quantity of evidences provided i...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, however, if, regarding, so, whereas, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.6327345309 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 28.8173652695 42% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1831.0 2260.96107784 81% => OK
No of words: 358.0 441.139720559 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11452513966 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34981470047 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85919610044 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 204.123752495 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.474860335196 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 705.55239521 84% => 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: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => 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: 43.7765439758 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.722222222 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8888888889 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.16666666667 5.70786347227 55% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.209144837416 0.218282227539 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0742468895683 0.0743258471296 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0520128827848 0.0701772020484 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109270098455 0.128457276422 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0455526544999 0.0628817314937 72% => OK
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: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.06 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.