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.
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
The argument presented here is about the requirement of regular dental care to prevent tooth decay. It is shown that a study indicates that the children living in the mountain regions of Nepal had lower levels of tooth decay than than the children in the suburban areas in the United States. The conclusion drawn on this study, that though the children in the States visited the dentist more often than these children in Nepal, the regular dental care is ineffective. This conclusion is clearly based on fractured assumptions and hence making the conclusion flawed as described below.
Firstly, the argument says that the study was conducted on two groups: the Himalayan region of Nepal and the suburban United States. But it never mentions the age group of the children. Also, did all the children participate in the study? What was the population comparison between these demographic regions? We can't conclude about the dental health of such a huge area without taking into the major portion of the population. This assumption could have been strengthened if the study gave all the demographic details of these area, the age group, the mean and the standard deviation in the age, etc. They should have given the statistics of comparison of the children with regards to all the above factors.
Secondly, child-rearing is different in different parts of the world. A child being brought up in a mountain area will obviously have a different upbringing than a child in a suburban region. The study clearly assumes that the environment for all these children is same. This brings out the following questions. Did the children eat the same food? Are they having the same teeth cleaning habits? How much aware are the parents regarding the dental health of their children in both regions? Nothing of this sort has been identified in the study. This assumption could have been supported if the study also included the habits of these children. May be an index of variability of number of times the children clean their teeth per day may help. A study of the food that these children consume can also give insights of the reasons about the current dental health of the two regions.
Lastly, blaming only the regular dental care for taking care of the dental health in the suburban region is totally wrong. The assumption that the tooth care is only the responsibility of the dental check up is quite flawed. It may have happened that the children in these suburban regions never actually took care of their teeth outside of the check-ups. The food habits of such children may have contributed to the deteriorating dental health, but we never never know this. May be the ignorant habits of both the children and their family led to this situation. This could have supported by making the the family participate in the study. They could have asked the family about how much care they took while feeding particular food to the children.
In the end, the argument in its current form is totally flawed. It ignores many factors essential to dental health care, thus arriving to the mentioned weak and biased conclusion.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 226, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: than
...f Nepal had lower levels of tooth decay than than the children in the suburban areas in t...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 313, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...n between these demographic regions? We cant conclude about the dental health of suc...
^^^^
Line 3, column 522, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this area' or 'these areas'?
Suggestion: this area; these areas
...udy gave all the demographic details of these area, the age group, the mean and the standa...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 649, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (May) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...luded the habits of these children. May be an index of variability of number of ti...
^^
Line 7, column 454, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: never
...the deteriorating dental health, but we never never know this. May be the ignorant habits o...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 481, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (May) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...alth, but we never never know this. May be the ignorant habits of both the childre...
^^
Line 7, column 601, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...on. This could have supported by making the the family participate in the study. They c...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 601, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...on. This could have supported by making the the family participate in the study. They c...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, lastly, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2594.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 527.0 441.139720559 119% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92220113852 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79129216042 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51931247007 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 204.123752495 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.432637571157 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 786.6 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 4.96107784431 242% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 31.0 19.7664670659 157% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.778192054 57.8364921388 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.6774193548 119.503703932 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 23.324526521 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.58064516129 5.70786347227 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.67664670659 278% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.322510857137 0.218282227539 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0845238876931 0.0743258471296 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.120262910838 0.0701772020484 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180140395372 0.128457276422 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.12336298374 0.0628817314937 196% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 14.3799401198 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.3550499002 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.197005988 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.96 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.32208582834 91% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 98.500998004 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => 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
---------------------
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.