A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pets that had consumed the food experienced vomiting, lethargy, and other signs of illness. After the recall, the pet food company tested samples from the recalled food and determined that all chemicals found in the food were chemicals that are approved for use in pet food. Thus, the recalled food was not responsible for these symptoms, and the company should not devote further resources to the investigation.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
Here author is saying that a pet food company recalled 4 million pound packet of pet food and perform some test on it, and on the basis of that test company is trying to state that the pet food does not contain any other chemical that are harmful.At the first sight author's argument may sounds good but it contain some major loop holes.
The very first thing i found it unclear is that, here author is not clearly mentioning the number of samples on which the test was performed.It may be possible that the test was done only on few samples and that sample does not contain any harmful chemical.
Here author also make assumption that all the chemical found in a samples was not harmful.This assumption is somewhat uncertain because it is also possible that chemical is not harmful but the reaction of that chemical with some other chemical present in a pet food may produce some other chemical and this chemical may be harmful.
Third loop hole that i found in the argument is that, author is not clearly saying that weather the test was performed by company itself or it was performed by some other third party firm. If the test were performed by company itself then it may be biased so it may not produce the desire result.
In the conclusion we can say that author is making a good argument about the company was not responsible for the result of some bad effects on the pets who consumed the food, But here author fails to fortify his argument by not providing or not considering some other factors other than the approved chemicals can be also responsible for this.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-14 | srujanakeerthi | 49 | view |
| 2019-12-03 | Opak Pulu | 65 | view |
| 2019-11-30 | farhadmoqimi | 29 | view |
| 2019-11-05 | Prudhvi6054 | 63 | view |
| 2019-11-03 | solankis304 | 29 | view |
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 50
- Governments should invest as much in the arts as they do in the military. 50
- A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pets that had consumed the food experienced vomiting, lethargy, and other signs of illness. After the recall, the pet food company tested samples from the recalled foo 63
Comments
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
the arguments are too short.
----------------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/pet-food-company-r…
---------------------
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: 6 15
No. of Words: 286 350
No. of Characters: 1273 1500
No. of Different Words: 121 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.112 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.451 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.223 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 83 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 63 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 34 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 14 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 47.667 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 15.293 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 1 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.541 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.925 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.199 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 248, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: At
...ain any other chemical that are harmful.At the first sight authors argument may so...
^^
Line 1, column 307, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'contains'?
Suggestion: contains
...authors argument may sounds good but it contain some major loop holes. The very firs...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... but it contain some major loop holes. The very first thing i found it unclear ...
^^
Line 2, column 24, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
...jor loop holes. The very first thing i found it unclear is that, here author i...
^
Line 2, column 143, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: It
...samples on which the test was performed.It may be possible that the test was done ...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...does not contain any harmful chemical. Here author also make assumption that al...
^^
Line 3, column 67, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a sample' or simply 'samples'?
Suggestion: a sample; samples
...sumption that all the chemical found in a samples was not harmful.This assumption is some...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 92, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
...ical found in a samples was not harmful.This assumption is somewhat uncertain becaus...
^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ical and this chemical may be harmful. Third loop hole that i found in the argu...
^^
Line 4, column 24, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
...may be harmful. Third loop hole that i found in the argument is that, author i...
^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... it may not produce the desire result. In the conclusion we can say that author...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, so, then, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 55.5748502994 43% => 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: 1295.0 2260.96107784 57% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 283.0 441.139720559 64% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.57597173145 5.12650576532 89% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.56307096286 90% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.31776263317 2.78398813304 83% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 204.123752495 60% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.434628975265 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 399.6 705.55239521 57% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59920159681 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 19.7664670659 30% => 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: 47.0 22.8473053892 206% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 87.8515161445 57.8364921388 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 215.833333333 119.503703932 181% => OK
Words per sentence: 47.1666666667 23.324526521 202% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 7.0 5.70786347227 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 11.0 5.25449101796 209% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 8.20758483034 12% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => 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: 0.265567463845 0.218282227539 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142030213526 0.0743258471296 191% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.13107173825 0.0701772020484 187% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162886241644 0.128457276422 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.134523341869 0.0628817314937 214% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 23.7 14.3799401198 165% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.3550499002 84% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 19.3 12.197005988 158% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.17 12.5979740519 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 39.0 98.500998004 40% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 26.0 12.3882235529 210% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 20.8 11.1389221557 187% => OK
text_standard: 26.0 11.9071856287 218% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
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.