Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flue 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 writer of this analytical piece concludes that routine inoculations against cow flue should not be administered as there is small possibility of a death of a person as a result of the inoculations. At first glance, this suggestion may seem convincing to some people as to save lives we cannot sacrifice another life. However, the author failed to provide sufficient evidence to make his/her argument credible. readers can find several flaws in the author's argument which raise doubts in the readers' mind.
Firstly, the author claims that many lives can be saved through routine inoculations against cow flue in areas where the disease is detected. However, the author has not provided any information about efficiency of inoculations against cow flue. Moreover, the author failed to provide what is the time period between two inoculations. And why routine inoculations against cow flue need to be administered? Is it not possible to save life of people through single inoculations against cow flu. Furthermore, author had not provide the ways through which cow flue is spread. Which further weakens the argument.
Secondly, the author states that inoculations against cow flu should be routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. But, according to me, it is not prudent to administer inoculations to all the people of a area even a single case of cow flu is detected. Because, if there is only few cases of cow flu is detected and inoculations against cow flu will be administered to all people in that area then there is more chances of deaths of people through inoculation instead of cow flu. Thus, the author must provide how how many people are affected by cow flue in that area.
Another problem with the argument is that author has not provided the possibility of person die as a results of the inoculations. The author only claims that there is small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations. Is this probability is less than any death by any other method to save lives from cow flue ? or this probability is less than the probability of death by cow flu? We can not reach to this conclusion because the writer failed to provide statistical data about probability of death through inoculations and death through cow flu. In addition, it is possible that even though there is small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, routine inoculation may harmful to the health of the people.
In sum, the author's argument that we should not allow inoculation against cow flue because there is small possibility that a person will dies as a result of the inoculation can not be supported. The author should have provided information about flu affected area, the probability of death through cow flu as well as through inoculations against cow flu. Unless these information is provided, we cannot reach to the conclusion.
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: 22 15
No. of Words: 490 350
No. of Characters: 2376 1500
No. of Different Words: 164 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.705 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.849 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.806 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 175 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 123 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.273 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.976 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.391 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.563 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.196 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 415, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Readers
...ence to make his/her argument credible. readers can find several flaws in the authors a...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 453, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
.... readers can find several flaws in the authors argument which raise doubts in the read...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 522, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'provided'.
Suggestion: provided
...st cow flu. Furthermore, author had not provide the ways through which cow flue is spre...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 573, 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.
... ways through which cow flue is spread. Which further weakens the argument. Second...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 238, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ister inoculations to all the people of a area even a single case of cow flu is d...
^
Line 5, column 433, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are more chances'?
Suggestion: there are more chances
...istered to all people in that area then there is more chances of deaths of people through inoculation...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 545, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: how
... cow flu. Thus, the author must provide how how many people are affected by cow flue in...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 100, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a result' or simply 'results'?
Suggestion: a result; results
...ovided the possibility of person die as a results of the inoculations. The author only cl...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 335, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Or
...er method to save lives from cow flue ? or this probability is less than the proba...
^^
Line 9, column 13, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...he health of the people. In sum, the authors argument that we should not allow inocu...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 138, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'die'
Suggestion: die
...is small possibility that a person will dies as a result of the inoculation can not ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 362, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this information' or 'these informations'?
Suggestion: this information; these informations
...gh inoculations against cow flu. Unless these information is provided, we cannot reach to the con...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, thus, well, as to, in addition, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 55.5748502994 131% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2433.0 2260.96107784 108% => OK
No of words: 489.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9754601227 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70248278971 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87583173417 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.349693251534 0.468620217663 75% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 778.5 705.55239521 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.9178804194 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.375 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.375 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.04166666667 5.70786347227 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 12.0 5.25449101796 228% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 19.0 6.88822355289 276% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.453162600984 0.218282227539 208% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.153807881603 0.0743258471296 207% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.154253932702 0.0701772020484 220% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.296314271001 0.128457276422 231% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.12668105347 0.0628817314937 201% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.3799401198 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.79 8.32208582834 82% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 98.500998004 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.