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.
The author concludes that we can cure many chronic illnesses by emulating the way ancient humans ate. At first glance, it appears to be sounding to me. However, after deeper thoughts, I believe that the author commits a few fallacies and these make\\\ the statement unwarranted.
First of all, although the author claims strong anecdotal evidence proves that people who consume bone broth will have fewer chronic diseases, he fails to provide the detail of the evidence. The evidence could be a robust, objective statistical outcome conducted by statisticians or a field, subjective qualitative survey based on few sampling data, which makes the "strong anecdotal evidence" questionable.
Moreover, even ancient humans do really chronic illnesses by eating Paleo diets doesn't mean that modern people can cure those illnesses by emulating eating habits from human ancestors. Human have been evolving for more than ten thousand years, we are uncertain if our organs, body types change as well, and those evolution would make the illness-curing diet uncertain to our modern bodies.
Based on the above questionable assumptions the author provides, I disagree the author's statement that we can emulate the way ancient humans to cure many chronic illnesses, which need more clarifications that I stated above.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 134, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...ans ate. At first glance, it appears to be sounding to me. However, after deeper thoughts, ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 81, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...chronic illnesses by eating Paleo diets doesnt mean that modern people can cure those ...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 308, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this evolution' or 'those evolutions'?
Suggestion: this evolution; those evolutions
... organs, body types change as well, and those evolution would make the illness-curing diet unce...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 81, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ons the author provides, I disagree the authors statement that we can emulate the way a...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, moreover, really, so, well, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 19.6327345309 20% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 18.0 55.5748502994 32% => More preposition wanted.
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: 1117.0 2260.96107784 49% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 204.0 441.139720559 46% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47549019608 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.77926670891 4.56307096286 83% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8491822147 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 204.123752495 66% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.656862745098 0.468620217663 140% => OK
syllable_count: 347.4 705.55239521 49% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 19.7664670659 40% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.9478940414 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.625 119.503703932 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5 23.324526521 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 5.70786347227 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.125571538764 0.218282227539 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0487147277323 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0414234569608 0.0701772020484 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0656842208795 0.128457276422 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0481390505177 0.0628817314937 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 14.3799401198 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.8 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.99 8.32208582834 120% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 98.500998004 67% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.