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 pet food company is recommending that the recalled food was not responsible for vomiting, lethargy and other signs of illness in pets rather it is caused by the chemicals which are present in the recalled food.
To begin, are the addional chemicals found in the recalled found harmful? The information about the chemicals is very important to make the decision about the recalled food. For instance, it would be possible that the chemicals recognised is not harmful -perhaps the chemicals recognised might be more useful rather than being harmful. There are many chemicals which are identified as useful rather being destructive. There are many tablets which contain some amount of chemicals which are the significant part of it. Such chemicals when removed will cause unseen problems. The removal of those chemicals should be avoid in such case. Thus, the more information about whether the chemicals found is harmful is needed to take a decision.
Secondly, how is the quantity of chemicals found in the recalled food? The problems be caused by some other ingridient rather than the chemicals found. The pet food company is proposing that the chemicals found itself is harmful without carefully anlysis the quantity in which they are present in the recalled food. For instance, the chemicals found might of very low quantity when compared to the items in the recalled food. There are many chemicals which are need to be stored for a long time. In such cases, the addition of chemicals in the food will be necessary. However, the quantity of those chemicals matters a lot. If the quantity of certain chemical is not proper then it might cause a serious health issue. Thus, the information about the quantity is required to analyse the argument.
Finally, there is no proof that these chemicals causes vomiting, lethargy and other signs of illness. The pet food company is assuming that the chemicals are causing these health issues with no proof. For illustration, there might be other substance which is added to increase the taste of the food causing the health issues - perhaps the chemicals would be enchancing the strength if the pet instead dimnishing. There will be many substances added to the food for it to taste good. While doing it, the company might have added certain substance which id injurious to health.
Any such of evidence of other substance cuasing such health issues will weaken the arguemtn made by pet food comapny.
Clearly, we need more information for the complete understanding of weaknesses and strengths. The additonal information about whether the chemicals is harmful, in what quantity they are present and the qualityof other substances in the recalled food is required. Therefore, careful scrutiny is needed to decide whether the chemicals need to be removed fro the recalled food.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 14 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 464 350
No. of Characters: 2307 1500
No. of Different Words: 166 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.641 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.972 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.541 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 137 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 96 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.185 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.939 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.407 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.353 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.508 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.142 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 616, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'avoided'?
Suggestion: avoided
...he removal of those chemicals should be avoid in such case. Thus, the more informatio...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 351, Rule ID: MODAL_OF[1]
Message: It's never correct to use "of" after a modal verb. Use 'might have', or, in informal register, 'might've'.
Suggestion: might have; might've
...food. For instance, the chemicals found might of very low quantity when compared to the ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 625, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ntity of those chemicals matters a lot. If the quantity of certain chemical is not...
^^
Line 8, column 21, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...urious to health. Any such of evidence of other substance cuasing such health i...
^^
Line 11, column 353, Rule ID: FOR_FRO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'for'?
Suggestion: for
...hether the chemicals need to be removed fro the recalled food.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, while, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 41.0 19.6327345309 209% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2378.0 2260.96107784 105% => OK
No of words: 464.0 441.139720559 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.125 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64119157421 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61074383092 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.377155172414 0.468620217663 80% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 729.0 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.753512438 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.0740740741 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1851851852 23.324526521 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.18518518519 5.70786347227 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.285521401105 0.218282227539 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104621200679 0.0743258471296 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.139270001057 0.0701772020484 198% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.239710688312 0.128457276422 187% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.178431350638 0.0628817314937 284% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.24 8.32208582834 87% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 98.500998004 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.