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.
A study had been conducted among the children living in the Himalayan region in Nepal and the children living in the suburban areas in the United States. The results of the research concluded that the children living in Nepal had lower levels of tooth decay than the kids of the US, despite the fact that the children in Nepal received little to no professional dental care compared to the the people in the US visited a dentist an average of 1.25 times per year. Conclusion drawn from the above argument states that regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay, based on a few logical fallacies or assumptions that could be easily weakened.
Firstly, the argument fails to consider the impact of location having an effect on the tooth problems. It is quite likely, that the people of Nepal, because of the dearth of resources are more inclined to used therapeutic herbs or sticks of Neem tree to clean their teeth on a regular bases. However, people in the United States use toothpaste which is made up of chemicals such as fluorine and chlorine compounds, that could possibly have a deleterious impact on the health of the teeth.
Secondly, the eating habits of the two groups differ to a very great extent. The kids of Nepal would hardly be eating chocolates, candies and other sweet products that have been proven to have a negative impact on the teeth at a very young age, which explains why the kids have less tooth decay despite receiving little to no professional dental care.
Thirdly, the descendants of the kids of the suburbans of the United states are heterogeneous. Many of the parents of the kids might have had the tooth decay problem at a very young age, and might have passed down the trait to their kids. While on the contrary, it is possible to a great extent that the genes passed to the Nepali kids are less susceptible to tooth decay at an early age, resolving the paradox in the argument.
Finally, the regular visits to the dentist could prove to be advantageous at a later span in life. Moreover, people who regularly visit the dentists have more chances of having all their teeth intact to a much later age compared to those who pay no visit to the dentist at all. Plausibly, the kids of Nepal may have tooth decay at a high rate in the adults, justifying the lack of dental care at the right time. The argument assumes that the kids of Nepal do not have tooth decay problems, hence they certainly would never have such a problem in their adult life.
As a result,the conclusion of the argument is drawn based on dearth of evidence that could strengthen the main argument. But their are also many possible reasons that could evidently weaken the conclusion made by the author of the argument. Moreover, a single survey certainly cannot help to draw the conclusion of a huge area comprising of varied people, where each person differs from the rest to a great extent, based on different implicit factors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 387, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...no professional dental care compared to the the people in the US visited a dentist an a...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 387, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...no professional dental care compared to the the people in the US visited a dentist an a...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 421, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'could'.
Suggestion: could
...s fluorine and chlorine compounds, that could possibly have a deleterious impact on the health...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 428, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... resolving the paradox in the argument. Finally, the regular visits to the denti...
^^^^^
Line 11, column 12, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , the
...lem in their adult life. As a result,the conclusion of the argument is drawn bas...
^^^^
Line 11, column 126, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...could strengthen the main argument. But their are also many possible reasons that cou...
^^^^^
Line 11, column 328, Rule ID: COMPRISING_OF[1]
Message: Did you mean 'comprising' or 'consisting of'?
Suggestion: comprising; consisting of
...p to draw the conclusion of a huge area comprising of varied people, where each person differ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'then', 'third', 'thirdly', 'while', 'such as', 'as a result', 'on the contrary', 'to a great extent']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.261101243339 0.25644967241 102% => OK
Verbs: 0.129662522202 0.15541462614 83% => OK
Adjectives: 0.088809946714 0.0836205057962 106% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0497335701599 0.0520304965353 96% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0142095914742 0.0272364105082 52% => OK
Prepositions: 0.131438721137 0.125424944231 105% => OK
Participles: 0.0479573712256 0.0416121511921 115% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.44598148885 2.79052419416 88% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0337477797513 0.026700313972 126% => OK
Particles: 0.00177619893428 0.001811407834 98% => OK
Determiners: 0.159857904085 0.113004496875 141% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0195381882771 0.0255425247493 76% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0195381882771 0.0127820249294 153% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2961.0 2731.13054187 108% => OK
No of words: 520.0 446.07635468 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69423076923 6.12365571057 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77530192783 4.57801047555 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.313461538462 0.378187486979 83% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.205769230769 0.287650121315 72% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.15 0.208842608468 72% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0884615384615 0.135150697306 65% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44598148885 2.79052419416 88% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 207.018472906 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.45 0.469332199767 96% => OK
Word variations: 52.0436387054 52.1807786196 100% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 28.8888888889 23.2022227129 125% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.1149105392 57.7814097925 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 164.5 141.986410481 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.8888888889 23.2022227129 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.16666666667 0.724660767414 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 3.58251231527 195% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 49.4658119658 51.9672348444 95% => OK
Elegance: 2.2752293578 1.8405768891 124% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.509946713958 0.441005458295 116% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.175843599098 0.135418324435 130% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0858083118229 0.0829849096947 103% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.700958565057 0.58762219726 119% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.11119641739 0.147661913831 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.248966730627 0.193483328276 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.150070974241 0.0970749176394 155% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.509430209966 0.42659136922 119% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0849886509104 0.0774707102158 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.344461596735 0.312017818177 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.16449198417 0.0698173142475 236% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.87684729064 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.82512315271 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 9.0 5.36822660099 168% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 16.0 14.657635468 109% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
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: This is not the final score. 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.