A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal receive little to no professional dental care, while people in suburban areas in the United States see a dentist an average of 1.25 times per year. Thus, regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay.
The given passage concludes that regular dental care isn't helpful in preventing tooth decay.The author draws this conclusion, from the premise, that children living in the mountain region, receive little to no dental care, suffer from fewer cases of tooth decay, as compared to the suburban children in the USA, where the people visit the dentist more often. This argument is rife with holes, and is based on several unaccounted assumptions. For example, he has assumed that the overt environmental differences between the two places, doesn't play any role in tooth decay.
Firstly, the author assumes that the factors promoting tooth decay, are equally present in the suburban regions of the USA and the Himalayan region of Nepal. He does not take into account, that the suburban regions in the USA, due to easier access to chocolates and candy, may promote tooth decay in humans. The Himalayan region on the other-hand, doesn't have as much access to these items, hence causing fewer cases of tooth decay.
Secondly, the author assumes that the only people suffering from tooth decay are children. He does not take into account the adults of the respective societies. What if in the case of the adults was different? Would the author be forced to change his view-point? This assumption would be made completely redundant, if research were to show that, within the adult population, the results were the exact opposite. In that case, the findings would suggest that the dental care was useful.
Additionally, the author states that people in the suburban areas in the USA visit the dentist an average of 1.25 times a year. There is a chance that the people suffering from tooth decay, did not even visit the dentist! This is because of the discrepancy in the average value. This average of 1.25 might also be possible, if some people visited the dentist more than 5 times a year, while others did not visit the dentist at all. Also there is no clear indication that this average of 1.25 visits a year, is that of the children. This is because he only mentions the people in suburban areas, and not necessarily the children of the suburbs.
Finally, in order to strengthen his argument and make it more cogent, he must provide us with more evidence of the actual percentage of children in both the Himalayas and suburbs of USA, suffering from tooth decay problems. He must also account for the environmental differences of the two places, and how they hinder or promote tooth decay. And lastly, he must also consider the regional availability and accessibility of chocolates and candy, which are known to be major causes of tooth decay!
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 54, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...sage concludes that regular dental care isnt helpful in preventing tooth decay.The a...
^^^^
Line 1, column 93, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
... isnt helpful in preventing tooth decay.The author draws this conclusion, from the ...
^^^
Line 1, column 536, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...tal differences between the two places, doesnt play any role in tooth decay. First...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 349, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...The Himalayan region on the other-hand, doesnt have as much access to these items, hen...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 139, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...average of 1.25 times a year. There is a chance that the people suffering from to...
^^
Line 7, column 434, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...thers did not visit the dentist at all. Also there is no clear indication that this ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, then, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2200.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 447.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92170022371 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.59808378696 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50957058817 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 204.123752495 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.463087248322 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 689.4 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Interrogative: 2.0 0.471057884232 425% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.6006005979 57.8364921388 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.0 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.35 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.05 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248469607567 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0739141167283 0.0743258471296 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0741138288657 0.0701772020484 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138443335761 0.128457276422 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0749263832469 0.0628817314937 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.