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 the 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 statement above is contending against routinely administered inoculations on a fundamentally void basis. Instead, it draws from conjecture, defying the need to support its claims clearly and scientifically.
Administration of the vaccination, as stated, contains a small risk factor. However, the statement fails to give statistical evidence to the claim, with no quantified proof, such as number of fatalities per year, that support the assertion that correlates the deaths to the vaccine. The statement should have included a mention of studies conducted that would have solidified the claims. This way, better insight into the relative success and failure rates would make it much clearer for patients to understand the risks. More importantly, however, these studies are liable to study the various states in which the patients are subjected to, and such research could potentially show that a patient’s immune system or other physiological factors create negative responses to the vaccination. Such demonstrations, if they had been stated, would allow potential patients to get tested first before choosing to be inoculated. This way, patients would be, as they rightfully should, faced with the option to choose whether they would like to be inoculated or not. Since the fatality risk is supposedly minimal, and therefore insignificant, it should not be an issue for some, if not most, residents to choose to be inoculated, especially since they dwell within disease-infested areas.
In addition, the statement does not clearly define some of the terminology. For example, there is a certain ambiguity surrounding the phrase “routinely administered”. The statement does not indicate the intervals between inoculations, and we are left to speculate that perhaps the fatality risk is associated with the number of times patients should be administered. Meaning, cow flu could only be combated by a certain number of inoculations. However, patients could potentially choose to skip inoculations, which may leave them susceptible to succumb to the illness. Coupling the number of administrations with scientific studies, there could be demonstrations of patients that have contracted the illness prior to or in between administrations. The number of deaths, therefore, would be proven to be due to unfortunate or inopportune circumstances, rather than placing fault on the vaccine itself.
Nevertheless, the evidence could potentially strengthen the argument. Clear statistical analysis could prove that the “small possibility that the person will die” was, in fact, incorrectly marginalized. Instead, scientific research had proved that the vaccine or even the method of administration cause more fatalities than initially believed.
However, whether or not the statement is appropriately prohibiting routine administrations should be made clear with lexical clarity and supported by scientific evidence. The argument made should not withhold the public’s own choices to be inoculated, especially since the statement unambiguously states that the vaccine indeed does save many lives. The evidence provided would potentially reveal whether there is fault with the vaccine itself or the method of administration, or whether ill luck or physiological eccentricities is the cause of death.
- All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. Write a response in which you disc 50
- 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 the person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot per 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 52, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
..., the statement does not clearly define some of the terminology. For example, there is a ce...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 10, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...s than initially believed. However, whether or not the statement is appropriately prohibit...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['first', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'nevertheless', 'so', 'then', 'therefore', 'well', 'for example', 'in addition', 'in fact', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.209059233449 0.25644967241 82% => OK
Verbs: 0.174216027875 0.15541462614 112% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0714285714286 0.0836205057962 85% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0766550522648 0.0520304965353 147% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0209059233449 0.0272364105082 77% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0993031358885 0.125424944231 79% => OK
Participles: 0.0522648083624 0.0416121511921 126% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.38613921155 2.79052419416 121% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0383275261324 0.026700313972 144% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0993031358885 0.113004496875 88% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0365853658537 0.0255425247493 143% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0104529616725 0.0127820249294 82% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3339.0 2731.13054187 122% => OK
No of words: 492.0 446.07635468 110% => OK
Chars per words: 6.78658536585 6.12365571057 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70967865282 4.57801047555 103% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.447154471545 0.378187486979 118% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.357723577236 0.287650121315 124% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.272357723577 0.208842608468 130% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.19512195122 0.135150697306 144% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.38613921155 2.79052419416 121% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 207.018472906 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524390243902 0.469332199767 112% => OK
Word variations: 62.56782673 52.1807786196 120% => OK
How many sentences: 23.0 20.039408867 115% => OK
Sentence length: 21.3913043478 23.2022227129 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.7288961001 57.7814097925 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.173913043 141.986410481 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3913043478 23.2022227129 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.565217391304 0.724660767414 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 57.1636620714 51.9672348444 110% => OK
Elegance: 1.32692307692 1.8405768891 72% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.456651856591 0.441005458295 104% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.11106701287 0.135418324435 82% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0696291412581 0.0829849096947 84% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.541701502295 0.58762219726 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.130129070145 0.147661913831 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.174645396308 0.193483328276 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0611987603598 0.0970749176394 63% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.411986688196 0.42659136922 97% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.131391105212 0.0774707102158 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.295237616972 0.312017818177 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.053558645194 0.0698173142475 77% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.87684729064 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 6.46551724138 124% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 14.657635468 116% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.