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.
The argument is based upon a recent study which indicates that the children living in Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States. There author says that there are more number of dental care in United States with an average of 1.25 time per year as compared to Himalayan mountain region in Nepal.
Firstly, the author is trying to say that despite of the shortage of dentist in Himalayan mountains, children living there have lower tooth decay whereas in United States, there are many dentist but still children in United States suffer from tooth decay problems. But this fact does not prove that regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay. There are many factors that contribute in tooth decay problems such as lifestyle, diet, how we take care of our teeth by keeping them clean every time. Healthy habits are also very important in lowering the tooth decay problems. For example, in United States, children eat junk food, consume carbonated drinks at a very high level and after having such diet then don't bother to brush twice a day and opt healthy tooth habits then even after a point of time, the dentist is helpless in solving the tooth decay issues.
Secondly, if children do not brush properly or do not take proper care of their teeth then it is even difficult for a dentist to cure their problems. The author should have mentioned more convincing points to state that regular dental care is not helpful. It can be possible that children living in Himalayan mountains might have a better diet and lifestyle with healthy habits than the children living in United States.
However, the argument does not stand strong on the thoughts mentioned by the author. The author should come up with more reasons and facts to prove that regular dental is not helpful in preventing tooth decay problems. There In the end we can say that the argument needs detailed study of many more factors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 183, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun dentist seems to be countable; consider using: 'many dentists'.
Suggestion: many dentists
...cay whereas in United States, there are many dentist but still children in United States suf...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 188, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'dentists'?
Suggestion: dentists
...hereas in United States, there are many dentist but still children in United States suf...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 725, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...h level and after having such diet then dont bother to brush twice a day and opt hea...
^^^^
Line 13, column 225, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n preventing tooth decay problems. There In the end we can say that the argument ...
^^
Line 13, column 273, Rule ID: NEEDS_FIXED[1]
Message: "needs detailed" is only accepted in certain dialects. For something more widely acceptable, try 'detailing' or 'to be detailed'.
Suggestion: detailing; to be detailed
... end we can say that the argument needs detailed study of many more factors.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, still, then, whereas, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 33.0505617978 54% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 12.9106741573 23% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1658.0 2235.4752809 74% => OK
No of words: 341.0 442.535393258 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.86217008798 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.20532538791 2.79657885939 79% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 215.323595506 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.469208211144 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 504.0 704.065955056 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 6.24550561798 16% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.2370786517 64% => 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: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.4361984341 60.3974514979 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.538461538 118.986275619 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2307692308 23.4991977007 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 5.21951772744 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.439855173644 0.243740707755 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.157297163246 0.0831039109588 189% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.196616660793 0.0758088955206 259% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.287405182595 0.150359130593 191% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.208824185852 0.0667264976115 313% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.8420337079 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 12.1639044944 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.38 8.38706741573 88% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 100.480337079 53% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 11.8971910112 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => 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.