A recent study reported that pet owners have longer, healthier lives on average than do people who own no pets. Specifically, dog owners tend to have a lower incidence of heart disease. In light of these findings, Sherwood Hospital should form a partnership with Sherwood Animal Shelter to institute an adopt-a-dog program. The program would encourage dog ownership for patients recovering from heart disease, which should reduce these patients' chance of experiencing continuing heart problems and also reduce their need for ongoing treatment. As a further benefit, the publicity about the program would encourage more people to adopt pets from the shelter. And that will reduce the incidence of heart disease in the general population.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
In this passage, the author recommends to form a partnership with Sherwood Animal Shelter for an adopt-a-dog program and predicts its program and related further publicity could further improve people's general healthy status. Quite reasonable though such recommendation appears at first glance, the author's reasoning of the argument is unconvincing due to several unsubstantiated assumptions which, if proven unwarranted, will seriously challenge the author's viewpoint.
To start off, the author's reasoning heavily relies on the assumption that feeding pets could inevitably improve pet owners' overall healthy status. Based on the assumption the author therefore extrapolate that dog owners would have a lower incidence of heart disease. However, such assumption is potentially problematic because coincidence between feeding pets and longer, healthier life mightn't have well causal relationship. Nor do we know whether such report is distorted for the real situation of people's healthy status. Moreover, we have no idea about the lower incidence of heart disease of dog owners are caused by other factors, such as their regular or wholesome life habit. If it turns out that feeding pet can't necessarily lead to better healthy status of pet owners, or such report is just concocted for advertising to raise pets, or even dog owners are those having more regular exercises to keep health, the author's conclusion of good effect of adopting with pet in term of good health is untenable.
Furthermore, by stating that a nrew program of adapt-a-dog could help patients' recovery from heart disease and use less treatment, the author rules out alternatives which could rival with the one alleged in the argument. However, we need to re-examine the assumption that such partnership of keep dog could help patients improve their status of heart disease. It is likely that those patients in Sherwood Hospital might have other complications of heart disease, so that they can't allow to live with dogs, because the shed furs of dogs could exacerbate their disease. Also, it is of equal probability that the anticipated reduced treatment can't be put into practice, because such termination could endanger their life and they are really on the verge of death. If any of the aforementioned assumptions prove warranted, we are inclined to believe that such program could induce such wholesome result as mentioned by the author for partnership with Sherwood Animal Shelter.
Last but not least, while all of the assumptions mentioned above prove warranted, the author's recommendation is still unnecessary due to the doubtful assumption regarding the efficiency of publicity of the aforementioned partnership. Claiming that more advertisement of results of this program, the author seems too optimistic. It is unreasonable to assume that most of people in the district are likely to be impacted by the publicity, since they might be interested about other media sources, instead of news about health. Also, the author hastily comes to the conclusion that more people could be allured to adopt pets for the shelter, but does not discuss whether people could fully trust the rectitude of such publicity without any doubt. Moreover, we can't even predict that their heart disease could be ameliorated, once they follow with suggestion to adopt pet from the shelter. If the public just ignore such publicity, or people keep suspicious about the truth of such advertisement, or majority of people have chronic heart disease and can't be improved any more, then so-called further estimated benefits are more likely to go in vain.
In summary, whether we should implement the author's recommendation heavily depends on the validity of the aforementioned assumptions. If those assumptions prove unwarranted, the author's recommendation could become little more than his/her wishful thinking and therefore we should consider other choices to improve overall healthy status for the public.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 620 350
No. of Characters: 3299 1500
No. of Different Words: 273 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.99 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.321 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.828 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 256 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 196 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 126 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 90 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 29.524 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.878 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.762 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.346 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.543 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.174 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 452, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...warranted, will seriously challenge the authors viewpoint. To start off, the authors...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 388, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: mightn't
...feeding pets and longer, healthier life mightnt have well causal relationship. Nor do w...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 717, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...habit. If it turns out that feeding pet cant necessarily lead to better healthy stat...
^^^^
Line 3, column 917, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...g more regular exercises to keep health, the authors conclusion of good effect of...
^^
Line 3, column 923, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... regular exercises to keep health, the authors conclusion of good effect of adopting w...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 477, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...ications of heart disease, so that they cant allow to live with dogs, because the sh...
^^^^
Line 5, column 488, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'living'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'allow' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: living
... heart disease, so that they cant allow to live with dogs, because the shed furs of dog...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 641, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
... that the anticipated reduced treatment cant be put into practice, because such term...
^^^^
Line 7, column 27, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...l Shelter. Last but not least, while all of the assumptions mentioned above prove warra...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 87, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ns mentioned above prove warranted, the authors recommendation is still unnecessary due...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 363, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the people') or simply say ''most people''.
Suggestion: most of the people; most people
...stic. It is unreasonable to assume that most of people in the district are likely to be impact...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 758, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...blicity without any doubt. Moreover, we cant even predict that their heart disease c...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1047, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...f people have chronic heart disease and cant be improved any more, then so-called fu...
^^^^
Line 9, column 45, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ummary, whether we should implement the authors recommendation heavily depends on the v...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 179, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...hose assumptions prove unwarranted, the authors recommendation could become little more...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, really, regarding, so, still, then, therefore, well, while, in summary, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 28.8173652695 142% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 82.0 55.5748502994 148% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3354.0 2260.96107784 148% => OK
No of words: 618.0 441.139720559 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42718446602 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.98594081286 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89181348402 2.78398813304 104% => OK
Unique words: 286.0 204.123752495 140% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.462783171521 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 1037.7 705.55239521 147% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 2.70958083832 369% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.67365269461 358% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 22.8473053892 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 57.208335501 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.714285714 119.503703932 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.4285714286 23.324526521 126% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.33333333333 5.70786347227 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 15.0 5.25449101796 285% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.207290405888 0.218282227539 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0732019408888 0.0743258471296 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0627668075994 0.0701772020484 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113357800133 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0948755909022 0.0628817314937 151% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.9 14.3799401198 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 48.3550499002 69% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.197005988 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.81 12.5979740519 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 147.0 98.500998004 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.1389221557 122% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.