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

Essay topics:

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.

Medical science has always been an evolving field. A chemical once considered deleterious have been later found to have certain properties that can act as an antidote for maladies. The reverse is also true. The recent investigation by the pet food company on its recalled products concluded that it does not have any prohibited ingredients. The company, however, should not stop the investigation because clearly their products have been alleged to have caused illness and if such an effect can be scientifically attributed to their product, then it is incumbent on the company to inform the authorities to include such contriving chemicals in the list of prohibited items. This is important because one's act legal yet immoral. No wonder law and the concept of legality is always in a flux. Hence, the claim that company should stop investigating further is based on unsubstantiated assumptions.

Firstly, the fact that the company's pet products does not have any prohibited item is not a conclusive evidence of the product not been the reason behind the alleged illness. This is a testable assumption. The extant law only represents the result of cumulative research conducted till date and not the possible results of future research. Hence, the list of prohibited items is not, and rightly so, sacrosanct. As new results emerge, this list will be updated. For instance, Chloro Floro Carbons (CFC) had been used extensively in early 20th century as it was not a banned substance. However, after the discovery of its implications on ozone layer, the same was banned by nations across the world.

Secondly, the investigation assumes that assay conducted on recalled products is sufficient to conclude for the whole batch of products manufactured by the company over the years. Their assumption that the sample is representative should be tested rigorously. It is likely, that alleged illness is due to consumption of products produced in particular batch only, and none of them were represented in the recalled products. Or it is possible that the same ingredients can be harmless to certain dogs, but cause illness to others. Also, the ingredients may have different impacts depending upon the environmental factors of the places where they have been consumed. For instance, high sugar food would increase the

In conclusion, the claim that the company should stop any further investigation hinges on multifarious assumption that have not been proved to be valid. The ingredients can still be deleterious despite being not included in the prohibited list. Also the recalled sample may not be representative. Hence, a comprehensive investigation should be conducted to establish or rebuff causality using a representative sample.

Votes
Average: 3 (3 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 16, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Medical science has always been an evolving field. A che...
^^
Line 1, column 343, 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.
...es not have any prohibited ingredients. The company, however, should not stop the i...
^^^
Line 1, column 710, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tems. This is important because ones act legal yet immoral. No wonder law and the...
^^
Line 6, column 714, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ance, high sugar food would increase the In conclusion, the claim that the compan...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 246, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...ng not included in the prohibited list. Also the recalled sample may not be represen...
^^^^
Line 9, column 307, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ple may not be representative. Hence, a comprehensive investigation should be co...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, for instance, in conclusion, in particular

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.6327345309 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2306.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 435.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30114942529 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04396810787 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 204.123752495 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.503448275862 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 723.6 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 66.1538085743 57.8364921388 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.0833333333 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.125 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.375 5.70786347227 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.125403739259 0.218282227539 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0348762521162 0.0743258471296 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0623235226475 0.0701772020484 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0758373416729 0.128457276422 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0232592307013 0.0628817314937 37% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.16 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.99 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 98.500998004 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => 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.

samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/pet-food-company-r…

----------------------------

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 435 350
No. of Characters: 2248 1500
No. of Different Words: 216 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.567 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.168 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.979 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 166 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 134 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 92 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 61 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.092 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.64 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.256 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.405 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.039 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5