Paleo diets, in which one eats how early hominids (human ancestors) did, are becoming increasingly popular. Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food, especially bone broth, a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours. They believe it has many health-promoting nutrients, such as cartilage, which can heal our joints, and chondroitin, which promotes nerve regeneration. Skeptics point out that ingested cartilage can’t replenish cartilage in your knees or elbows and ingested chondroitin doesn’t make our brains any healthier. Yet, there is strong anecdotal evidence that people who consume bone broth have fewer metabolic and inflammatory diseases than those who don’t. Therefore, ancient humans knew something about our physiology that we don’t, and that by emulating the way they ate, we can cure many chronic illnesses.
There are several holes in the theory that chronic illnesses are cured by the Paleo diet, as asserted by the passage. The argument is rife with vague assumptions and claims which it fails to bolster. While the Paleo diet may bring some benefits that would otherwise not be realized, it is absurd to think that ancient humans were able to practice medicine more efficiently than ourselves.
Firstly, the text reports that "proponents" have made claims regarding our bodies and how they have evolved to eat food such as bone broths. However, there are no credentials assigned to these proponents and it can not be assumed that they are scientists or experts in the field. They are just as likely to be English Literature majors from a local community college. Unless the mentioned proponents have vast expertise and authority in the field of physiology or medicine, their claims hold very little weight and can not be taken as gospel.
The argument itself uses the phrase 'anecdotal evidence' which in and of itself is an oxymoron. The term 'anecdotal' refers to personal accounts rather than science-based research which is typically associated with the term 'evidence.' The association between bone broth consumption and disease can not be determined, as argued by the essay, due to the lack of information about the results. There is no claim as to how the results were obtained, and thus, they can not be trusted. The text does not specify whether or not other supplements and medications were being taken for the underlying diseases which could be the actual alleviating factor, rather than the bone broth.
In the days of our ancestors, food was not as readily available as it is today. Just walking into our kitchens and opening our pantries reveals a cornucopia that would be unfathomable by our ancestors. In all actuality, early hominids most likely ate what was available to them. No meal was guaranteed, and every part of a kill had to be utilized to ensure survival. This is paramount to disputing the claim that our ancestors were more knowledgable about physiology, as they were required to eat any and everything that they could.
The essay also fails to mention the extent of metabolic or inflammatory disease frequency in early hominids. There are no claims alluding to evidence that our ancestors actually had less disease, let alone that fact being due to their diet.
Due to the lack of evidence, past disease rates, controlled studies, and expertise from authorities in the field, it can not be concluded that paleo diets, however primitive, resulted in fewer instances of inflammatory or metabolic disease.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 437 350
No. of Characters: 2137 1500
No. of Different Words: 221 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.572 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.89 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.618 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 116 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.341 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.368 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.286 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.571 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.048 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 231, 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.
...ally associated with the term evidence. The association between bone broth consumpt...
^^^
Line 5, column 503, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...t be trusted. The text does not specify whether or not other supplements and medications were ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, firstly, however, if, may, regarding, so, thus, while, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2210.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 437.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05720823799 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57214883401 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81420993451 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 204.123752495 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528604118993 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 699.3 705.55239521 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.2190852461 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.5 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.85 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.6 5.70786347227 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233991684692 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0649529003327 0.0743258471296 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0552798961502 0.0701772020484 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105639461343 0.128457276422 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524325953668 0.0628817314937 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 98.500998004 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.