Paleo diets, in which one eats how early hominids (human ancestors) did, are becoming increasingly popular. Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food, especially bone broth, a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours. They believe it has many health-promoting nutrients, such as cartilage, which can heal our joints, and chondroitin, which promotes nerve regeneration. Skeptics point out that ingested cartilage can’t replenish cartilage in your knees or elbows and ingested chondroitin doesn’t make our brains any healthier. Yet, there is strong anecdotal evidence that people who consume bone broth have fewer metabolic and inflammatory diseases than those who don’t. Therefore, ancient humans knew something about our physiology that we don’t, and that by emulating the way they ate, we can cure many chronic illnesses.
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.
The following argument provided fails to provide ample scientific and statistical evidence to corroborate their claims of the health benefits associated with Paleo diet.
The foremost claim of how our human bodies have evolved to eat Paleo food is shallow because there is a lot of specific food items and even non-food items which can be easily dissected by our arduos digestive system. Just because there are no ill effects associated with the ingestion of a particular food, doesn't imply that the food is good on our health. Besides, before the advent of agriculture, humans were dependent on animal flesh and it's byproducts due to it's alleviating effects, but more because of survival and the lack of farming and the dependence on vegetation as a source of food. To justify the assertion, there need to be instances of food which our digestive couldn't adjust because the of ill effects linked with the food.
The belief on the health-promoting nutrients present in the food such as cartilage is the second fallacy. The cartilage will be made out of nutrients and minerals which were necessary for the correct function of animal's body. It is not clear whether the nutrients which are healing the animals will be same which are required to cure an abnormality in a human body. The healing effect on the human body are only, devoid of any empirical evidence as the critics of the belief have pointed out.
Anecdotes cannnot be the basis for stating facts. Insights should be derived from data. There are two groups of people: one who consume Paleo diet and the ones who do not. A person following a particular health regime is prone to take good care of his overall body and exercise more frequently. These secondary factors will surely add to the overall well being of the individual. Also, the food mentioned in the Paleo diet is uncommon and is more likely to be consumed by a more higher class of people who have better medical facilities at their disposal which could prevent the metabollic and inflammatory diseases mentioned by the proponents of Paleo diet. So this disparity between the people who consume and the category which abstains from Paleo diet could easily explain the origins of the anecdote. A unbiased randomised trail is required to prove the aforementioned assertion, wherein the category of people, age and the initial health of the individuals is similar. This statistical evidence could actually make or break the anecdote.
In conclusion, we have a group of people advocating a particular diet change based on unproved and skeptical assertions which need a lot more scientific introspection.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-23 | Ruhani | 59 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Mayuresh08 | 70 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Akash Konar | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | fabjaved | 62 | view |
| 2023-07-16 | hello_kratnesh101 | 47 | view |
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 440 350
No. of Characters: 2151 1500
No. of Different Words: 222 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.58 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.889 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.675 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 82 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 53 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.158 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.302 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.368 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.297 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.527 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.085 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 308, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ith the ingestion of a particular food, doesnt imply that the food is good on our heal...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 678, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...e instances of food which our digestive couldnt adjust because the of ill effects linke...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 475, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'higher' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: higher
... and is more likely to be consumed by a more higher class of people who have better medical...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 807, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'An' instead of 'A' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: An
...ly explain the origins of the anecdote. A unbiased randomised trail is required t...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, besides, but, if, second, so, well, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2194.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 438.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00913242009 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57476223824 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71881287588 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511415525114 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 711.0 705.55239521 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.3795474535 57.8364921388 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.473684211 119.503703932 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0526315789 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.89473684211 5.70786347227 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.206546901778 0.218282227539 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0570747823671 0.0743258471296 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0500737223346 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0970381376278 0.128457276422 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0487062887878 0.0628817314937 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 14.3799401198 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.