In the above argument which indicated that people taking dietary supplements are having less gastrointestinal problems in comparison to the people who are not taking motilac. Here, the author has come in to this conclusion based on the vague data which states exiguous amount of people in hospital with gastrointestinal problem because of the increase in the consumption of motilac substance by Greenhome residents. However, before this recommendation can be properly evaluated, there are certain things that needs to be addressed.
First of all, there are myriad of other reasons for suffering from gastrointestinal problems. In other words, gastrointestinal problems sometimes might be because of the eating disorder and malnutrition. For instance, people in the greenhouse residents might have good metabolism, and they're probably looking out for their sanitation as well whereas people from Etolin towns perhaps be not so concerned about their food and sanitation around the surrounding. If either of these scenarios has some merit, than the argument presented by the author is enervated.
Secondly, there is no certified data which proves that there are equal number of people in the Greenhouse residents and Etolin towns. This is one of the important point that need to be looked prudently. Even though, the consumption of dietary supplements are bounteous amount in Greenhouse residents which certainly have decreased the gastrointestinal severity among the people, but we can't assume that every one who took the supplements came to hospital for the treatment. Hence, this proves that author is speaking without any legit information.
In addition to that, Hospitals in the Etolin might have adduced every gastrointestinal problems with the less consumption of motilac substances. The aggrandization in the gastrointestinal problems might be because of the food adulteration and toxic chemicals. If the above statement is true then, argument doesn't hold any water.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to it's reliance on several unwarranted assumption. If the author is able to address all the quandaries, and offers to give more pellucidity to the argument(in a very systematic flow of research), then it will be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the proposed recommendation to consider the consumption of the dietary supplements to prevent from gastrointestinal severity.
- Motilac is a substance that occurs naturally in the human digestive tract Many consumers of dietary supplements containing motilac report significant easing of digestive discomfort after just a few weeks of use Among Greenhorne residents the consumption o 58
- Do you agree or disagree the following statement The more money a person has the more should he or she give away to charities 70
- Most people identify with a particular generation What are the qualities or characteristics that define your generation Use details and examples to support your explanation 76
- An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces A study reports that in nearby East Meria where fish consumption is very high people visit the doctor only once or twice per 63
- The first step to self knowledge is rejection of the familiar Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and supporting your po 70
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 11 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 374 350
No. of Characters: 2020 1500
No. of Different Words: 190 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.398 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.401 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.201 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 151 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 94 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 66 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.375 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.942 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.328 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.328 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.058 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 285, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: they're
...sidents might have good metabolism, and theyre probably looking out for their sanitati...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 504, Rule ID: COMMA_THAN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'then'?
Suggestion: then
...ther of these scenarios has some merit, than the argument presented by the author is...
^^^^
Line 3, column 299, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...bounteous amount in Greenhouse residents which certainly have decreased the gastr...
^^^
Line 3, column 388, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...tinal severity among the people, but we cant assume that every one who took the supp...
^^^^
Line 4, column 306, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... above statement is true then, argument doesnt hold any water. In conclusion, the arg...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, well, whereas, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2059.0 2260.96107784 91% => OK
No of words: 372.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.53494623656 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39173103935 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27541050358 2.78398813304 118% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 204.123752495 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524193548387 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 645.3 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 77.6144064833 57.8364921388 134% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.6875 119.503703932 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.25 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.4375 5.70786347227 165% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0913066188102 0.218282227539 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0277746669683 0.0743258471296 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0378319269579 0.0701772020484 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.054524498082 0.128457276422 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0295270687427 0.0628817314937 47% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 14.3799401198 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.3550499002 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.09 12.5979740519 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.