Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author argues that since the possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, hence they cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered. However the conclusion seems unconvincing because they stand on some questionable assumptions made by the author.
The author states that inoculations could save lives and then also makes a contradictory statement that they is a small chance that inoculations could kill people . The problem with this assumptions is that the author did not mention how likely is a person to die from cow flu. If he had provided some data which could have helped to determine what is more riskier to inoculate or not that would have given a more clearer picture and the arguement would have made more sense.
Further more the author states that inoculations should be done in areas where the disease is detected . However this arguement seems flawed because inoculating could be expensive and doing that with everyone in the area would not be feasible. There should be a test done to check whether that person has the cow flu or not and then they could be inoculated . Which would be a win win situation because people less people would be at a risk to die from the inoculation and as well as the cow flu .
To conclude the author arguements totally fails as it is standing on statistical and logical flaws .Author fails to provide enough evidence to justify his assumptions due to which entire aruguement suffers.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 23, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The author argues that since the possibility that a person will...
^^
Line 1, column 187, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...t cow flu to be routinely administered. However the conclusion seems unconvincing becau...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...able assumptions made by the author. The author states that inoculations coul...
^^^^
Line 3, column 114, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'be'
Suggestion: be
...kes a contradictory statement that they is a small chance that inoculations could ...
^^
Line 3, column 167, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ance that inoculations could kill people . The problem with this assumptions is th...
^^
Line 3, column 187, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ns could kill people . The problem with this assumptions is that the author did not ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 357, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'riskier' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: riskier
... could have helped to determine what is more riskier to inoculate or not that would have giv...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 414, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'clearer' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: clearer
...noculate or not that would have given a more clearer picture and the arguement would have ma...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rguement would have made more sense. Further more the author states that inoc...
^^^^
Line 5, column 107, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...e in areas where the disease is detected . However this arguement seems flawed bec...
^^
Line 5, column 110, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...n areas where the disease is detected . However this arguement seems flawed because ino...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 362, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...or not and then they could be inoculated . Which would be a win win situation beca...
^^
Line 5, column 382, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: win
... could be inoculated . Which would be a win win situation because people less people wo...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 415, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun people is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...d be a win win situation because people less people would be at a risk to die from t...
^^^^
Line 5, column 500, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...e inoculation and as well as the cow flu . To conclude the author arguements...
^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...oculation and as well as the cow flu . To conclude the author arguements totall...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 104, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...tanding on statistical and logical flaws .Author fails to provide enough evidence ...
^^
Line 6, column 105, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Author
...nding on statistical and logical flaws .Author fails to provide enough evidence to jus...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, hence, however, if, so, then, well, as a result, as well as, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 58.6224719101 39% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1236.0 2235.4752809 55% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 252.0 442.535393258 57% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90476190476 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98428260373 4.55969084622 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7455574912 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 215.323595506 61% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.52380952381 0.4932671777 106% => OK
syllable_count: 393.3 704.065955056 56% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 6.24550561798 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 20.2370786517 49% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.2614119968 60.3974514979 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.6 118.986275619 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2 23.4991977007 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.9 5.21951772744 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 18.0 7.80617977528 231% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 10.2758426966 10% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.342962736061 0.243740707755 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.152081855272 0.0831039109588 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.119659234002 0.0758088955206 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192902902764 0.150359130593 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.127122302901 0.0667264976115 191% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.44 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 100.480337079 54% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.