A recently issued twenty year study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia investigated the possible therapeutic effect of consuming salicylates Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin a medicine used to treat headaches Al

Essay topics:

A recently issued twenty-year study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia investigated the possible therapeutic effect of consuming salicylates. Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, food-processing companies also add salicylates to foods as preservatives. The twenty-year study found a correlation between the rise in the commercial use of salicylates and a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by study participants. At the time when the study concluded, food-processing companies had just discovered that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods, and, as a result, many companies plan to do so. Based on these study results, some health experts predict that residents of Mentia will suffer even fewer headaches in the future.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.

The conclusion of a twenty-year study on residents of Mentia found possible therapeutic effects of consuming the headache treating compound salicylate. Based on the investigation, some health experts predict that an increase in consumption of these compounds, when artificially added to food products, will lessen the reported headaches of people in Mentia. They formulate this argument by stating that a correlation exists between commercial additions of salicylates to foods and lessened headaches as well as concluding a trend will continue as the companies increase their efforts in finding ways to incorporate more of the drug into products. However, the health experts’ predictions are based upon incomplete evaluation of the evidence and must answer three questions to further examine the validity of their argument.

First of all, did the participants in the study actually consume any of these artificially fortified foods? It is possible that the group studied sourced their meals from organically grown items that contained no additives. The evidence presented in the argument does not mention the source of the original study group’s foods nor how much salicylates they actually consumed during the trial. If this holds true and these people did not actually consume foods with the added drug, then the conclusion drawn is invalidated.

Secondly, can this decrease in reported headaches be attributed to another source other than the result of adding salicylates to consumer’s foods? Perhaps the decline in headaches has resulted from other drugs being used by the populace. It is possible that a number of the study participants started using prescription medications to treat their headaches during this time period. If this alternative drug treatment- or other possible treatments for that matter- can be shown, then the conclusion is severely weakened.

Lastly, is there a possibility that this continued push for finding ways to increase salicylates into food won’t actually increase headaches if too much of the drug is consumed? The conclusion predicts a decrease in headaches as the drug incorporation increases; however, this may not be the case. It may be that salicylates have a potential threshold of effectiveness based on blood plasma concentrations that once passed actually have a negative effect on headaches. This possibility would certainly limit the credibility of the argument.

In conclusion, the statement by the health experts in regards to a continued decrease in headaches for the city of Mentia is definitely lacking in its persuasiveness as a sound argument. As outlined above, the three key questions must be answered to further evaluate the claim. If more details can be provided such as a medical review of salicylates, a more thorough evaluation of the study participants’ drug use, or their source of food, then a more realistic evaluation can be provided for the claim and prediction.

Votes
Average: 5.8 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 336, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...he original study group’s foods nor how much salicylates they actually consumed duri...
^^^^
Line 9, column 53, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
...on, the statement by the health experts in regards to a continued decrease in headaches for t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, then, well, in conclusion, such as, as well as, first of all

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2500.0 2260.96107784 111% => OK
No of words: 458.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45851528384 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07511726273 2.78398813304 110% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491266375546 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 774.9 705.55239521 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3905533766 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.578947368 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1052631579 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.84210526316 5.70786347227 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229770418083 0.218282227539 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0844309830685 0.0743258471296 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0880181350817 0.0701772020484 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136500673783 0.128457276422 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0538323708748 0.0628817314937 86% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.3550499002 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.1 8.32208582834 109% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 98.500998004 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 459 350
No. of Characters: 2432 1500
No. of Different Words: 219 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.629 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.298 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.973 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 181 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 155 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 126 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 77 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.158 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.518 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.632 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.304 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.537 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.041 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5