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.
The argument is based on the assumption that the chemicals found in tested pet food are approved to be used in pet food.With this assumption argument also assumed several other unstated factors. Like, it is clear that the chemicals were approved, but argument did not give any statement about the quality of chemicals and other roots found in the food.It might be possible that the the chemicals used were low quality, or more worse were expired. And the authority did not mention anything about the quality. Hence, without stating anything about the quality of ingredients used in making of pet food, argument looks absurd.
Even if we assumed that the quality of chemicals used was also good, argument did not mention anything about the environment and surroundings of the plants supposed to make these foods. Perhaps the conditions of the plants and machinery used to make those foods were not of approved quality, and hence should be investigated. Without further investigation of the environment and cleanliness of the place, the argument does not seems to satisfy the people petting the animals.
It is also possible that the procedure of making the food was not approved by the food authority. Like, if certain should be heated to certain before mixing in the final product, and the company's heater was not to that certain temperature, which causes the symptoms mentioned in the argument. Or perhaps, the roots used in the food was not cleaned properly. So, to make it a logical statement, authority should mention the satisfactory investigation of the overall procedure of making the food.
However, the argument mention a little about complaints. Perhaps the complaints received was the repeated complaints from a certain area, where due to viral, pets were ill. In these circumstances, the whole procedure done by the company was unnecessary and humorous.
On the basis of above discussion, the argument is found guilty of making several unstated assumptions and leaving several questions unanswered, and hence is incomplete.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/pet-food-company-r…
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 332 350
No. of Characters: 1666 1500
No. of Different Words: 144 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.269 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.018 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.669 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 122 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 39 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.714 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.982 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.393 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.659 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.149 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 121, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: With
...ood are approved to be used in pet food.With this assumption argument also assumed s...
^^^^
Line 1, column 353, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: It
...icals and other roots found in the food.It might be possible that the the chemical...
^^
Line 1, column 379, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...d in the food.It might be possible that the the chemicals used were low quality, or mor...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 379, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...d in the food.It might be possible that the the chemicals used were low quality, or mor...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 423, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'worse' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: worse
...the chemicals used were low quality, or more worse were expired. And the authority did not...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... of pet food, argument looks absurd. Even if we assumed that the quality of c...
^^
Line 3, column 430, Rule ID: DOES_X_HAS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'seem'? As 'do' is already inflected, the verb cannot also be inflected.
Suggestion: seem
...ess of the place, the argument does not seems to satisfy the people petting the anima...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 430, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[3]
Message: The verb 'does' requires base form of the verb: 'seem'
Suggestion: seem
...ess of the place, the argument does not seems to satisfy the people petting the anima...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...atisfy the people petting the animals. It is also possible that the procedure...
^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...verall procedure of making the food. However, the argument mention a little a...
^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ompany was unnecessary and humorous. On the basis of above discussion, the ar...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, look, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.9520958084 31% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1718.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 330.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20606060606 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26214759535 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76986273624 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 204.123752495 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.448484848485 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 540.0 705.55239521 77% => 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: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.7611378828 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.533333333 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 23.324526521 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.6 5.70786347227 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 11.0 5.25449101796 209% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
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: 0.21562362253 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0832577109682 0.0743258471296 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0792115464055 0.0701772020484 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112608226237 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0703901491764 0.0628817314937 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.08 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 98.500998004 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.