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 following argument is flawed for the following reasons. Primarily the argument is based on the unwarranted assumption that the human body has not changed from ancient times till today, rendering it's main conclusion, that by emulating the way ancient humans ate we can cure many chronic illnesses, invalid.
The argument fails to provide justification for that the human body has not evolved from the ancient times. For one, our body may have been less susceptible to diseases in the ancient times because of the lifestyle of our ancestors or due to the cleaner pollution free environment that they lived in. More significantly, the argument states that by emulating the food habits of the hominids one may cure many chronic illness. Considering how different our way of life and atmosphere is compare to that of the ancient times, the assumption that changing our food habits to align with ancient times is without bias. Had the argument provided scientific evidence that the the components of this soup contains the necessary nutrients to combat chronic illness. Even then, the argument must further prove that these illnesses are not a result of our present lifestyle or environmental pollution.
The argument also leaves many unanswered questions. The argument is based on the belief of our ancestors and anecdotal evidence and hence cannot be trusted completely. The lack of scientific evidence and the fact that skeptics point out that ingested cartilage can't replenish cartilage in our elbows and knees and chondroitin does not make our brains any healthier further weakens the main conclusion of the argument.
Finally the argument claims without warrant that what help true years ago will hold true today. So, even if we assume that the paleo diets have the necessary nutrients to promote nerve regeneration, the argument is lacking because it does not provide information to show that our body has not evolved from the ancient time till today
Because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, it fails to make a convincing case that by emulating the way hominids we can cure many chronic illnesses.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 5 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 344 350
No. of Characters: 1755 1500
No. of Different Words: 166 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.307 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.102 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.647 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 125 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 110 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 73 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.571 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.815 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.412 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.62 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.164 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 666, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...ument provided scientific evidence that the the components of this soup contains the n...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 666, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...ument provided scientific evidence that the the components of this soup contains the n...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 706, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the the components of this soup contains the necessary nutrients to combat chroni...
^^
Line 3, column 842, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...that these illnesses are not a result of our present lifestyle or environmental ...
^^
Line 3, column 847, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...these illnesses are not a result of our present lifestyle or environmental pollu...
^^
Line 5, column 81, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... questions. The argument is based on the belief of our ancestors and anecdotal ev...
^^
Line 5, column 170, 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.
...and hence cannot be trusted completely. The lack of scientific evidence and the fac...
^^^
Line 5, column 263, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...ptics point out that ingested cartilage cant replenish cartilage in our elbows and ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 267, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s point out that ingested cartilage cant replenish cartilage in our elbows and kn...
^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Finally,
...he main conclusion of the argument. Finally the argument claims without warrant tha...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, hence, if, may, so, then, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.6327345309 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 55.5748502994 67% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1791.0 2260.96107784 79% => OK
No of words: 344.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20639534884 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7099120359 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.505813953488 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 561.6 705.55239521 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => 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: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 92.5963435576 57.8364921388 160% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.769230769 119.503703932 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4615384615 23.324526521 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.15384615385 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.136544428774 0.218282227539 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0534849334831 0.0743258471296 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0349739249105 0.0701772020484 50% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0720736438136 0.128457276422 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0430446192583 0.0628817314937 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 98.500998004 85% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => 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.