In this memo, the author argues that a diet rich in dairy products may virtually increase preventing from having the risk of osteoporosis. Supposedly, previous prevailing thoughts about dairy and milk products was the rich proportion of Vitamin D and calcium in them was likely to prevent an environmental and genetic related disease and muscle-weakening. However, the author argues its outcome is the opposite by reasoning the symptoms of the products’ steady consumers and pointing out the characteristics of the above mentioned disease, osteoporosis. Yet, the argument is found to be specious in several respects.
To begin with, the argument relies on the assumption that majority of steady dairy product consumers’ symptoms are likely to be consistent. Yet the memo fails to substantiate the accuracy of data. Perhaps the data collection period was too short to evaluate such a conclusion. Or perhaps, the subjects or extents of data were too narrowed that it only retains information about a limited area. Thus, the research is recommended to be conducted in a more diverse and wide-ranged criteria which cover some obstacles to the conclusion.
Even if frequency of disease occurrence of osteoporosis to the products’ daily consumers turns out to have some merit, the memo fails to provide evidence to support this assumption. Perhaps, even though a person stops to eat dairy foods, osteoporosis or muscle-weakening still can occur due to human derogation. Muscle-weakening is one of the well-known elderly disease, which all human suffer one day. Also, since the cause of osteoporosis contains genetic factor, it could occur to the ones who has family genetic problem regardless of dairy food consumption.
Even if the author can substantiate the two forgoing assumptions, the argument relies on the additional assumption that if subjects of the research are really confined to daily consumers. For example, let’s say the research included two types of consumers regarded to be ‘frequent’ consumers; ones having dairy products every morning and the other having every morning and night. It seems they consume more than average, however, there is conspicuous difference between them: the former will have seven products per week while the latter twice as the former. If then, it is unreliable to say the former is also frequent consumers of the product. Therefore, more specific criteria for the research should be stood.
In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it, more accurate data source is required for proper evaluation. To better assess the argument, we would need to know that if the subjects of researchers were really confined to daily consumers and even stop having dairy products would really decrease the occurrence rate of osteoporosis.
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: 441 350
No. of Characters: 2285 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.583 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.181 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.911 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 172 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 138 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 103 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.2 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.619 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.289 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.518 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.085 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 309, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...d to be 'frequent' consumers; ones having dairy products every morning and...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, may, really, so, still, then, therefore, thus, well, while, as to, for example, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2382.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 441.0 441.139720559 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40136054422 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58257569496 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16235733358 2.78398813304 114% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.52380952381 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 747.0 705.55239521 106% => 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: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.2649627366 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.428571429 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.33333333333 5.70786347227 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => 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: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.220124799473 0.218282227539 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0589061318123 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0721293575241 0.0701772020484 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122525234329 0.128457276422 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0883801233906 0.0628817314937 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.04 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 98.500998004 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.