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 rec

Essay topics:

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.

It might seem logical, at first glance, to agree with the argument that regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay. However, in order to fully evaluate this argument, we need to have a significant amount of additional evidence. The argument could end up being much weaker than it seems, or it might actually be quite valid. In order to make that determination, we need to know more information and then analyze what we learn.

Firstly, we can't compare two groups of people living at different geographical locations, people of Nepal are staying in the Himalayan mountain region have limited access to dental health care when compared to people of the US staying in the suburban areas. For example, Nepalese might be following some regular tooth care instead of relying on any dentists. Therefore, Nepalese won’t require any sorts of regular dental care whereas people of the US might be not following good oral hygiene and because of this, they need regular health care. In that case, the argument’s claim is seriously weakened.

Another important factor that affects dental health care is genetics which is completely ignored in the above excerpt. Genetics doesn't just apply to immediate family but in fact to the larger community. We could conduct genetics test and find if genetics play a role here and maybe because of that Nepalese have good dental health. Conversely, if people of the US are facing tooth decays due to bad genetics then it concludes that no of visits to a doctor has no role here.

The data is faulty as there is no information about adults' dental health care of both the groups. For example, adults in the US might have reduced the tooth decay problems after regular visits to dentists in the early age whereas Nepalese might have developed some tooth decay problems later in their life. We can't extrapolate the things from children to adults. Thus, we need evidence about the dental health of adults to make a proper conclusion.

Finally, data is insufficient as we are unaware of the full extent of research. While we may be having accurate data from the US but cannot make the same claim about Nepal. For example, Nepalese might be having some informal dental health care in the Himalayas which might be not taken into consideration while doing the survey. Thus, without knowing the proper information about a survey process done in both the places we can't assure that regular dental health checkups are not preventing the tooth decay.

Clearly, then we need to have additional evidence in order to get a more complete understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the argument. We need to know about the extent of the survey, genetics test, adults' dental health and the oral hygiene of two groups of people. And we really need more information if we want to extend the results that regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay.

Votes
Average: 5.4 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 13, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...n analyze what we learn. Firstly, we cant compare two groups of people living at ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 129, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... ignored in the above excerpt. Genetics doesnt just apply to immediate family but in f...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 432, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
... to bad genetics then it concludes that no of visits to a doctor has no role here....
^^
Line 7, column 311, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
... decay problems later in their life. We cant extrapolate the things from children to...
^^^^
Line 9, column 425, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...rvey process done in both the places we cant assure that regular dental health check...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, conversely, finally, first, firstly, however, if, may, really, so, then, therefore, thus, whereas, while, for example, in fact

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 69.0 55.5748502994 124% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2421.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 493.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9107505071 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49671764247 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.448275862069 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 764.1 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.3205694693 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.260869565 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4347826087 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.13043478261 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.118465475459 0.218282227539 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0344437532984 0.0743258471296 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0503374966182 0.0701772020484 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0649823391255 0.128457276422 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0406945843838 0.0628817314937 65% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 98.500998004 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 495 350
No. of Characters: 2359 1500
No. of Different Words: 212 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.717 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.766 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.409 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 178 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 111 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 69 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 35 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.522 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.812 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.783 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.337 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.56 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.21 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5