An international development organization in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A While seeds for this new type of millet cost more farmers will be p

The argument here discuss about the way to combat vitamin A deficiency in the impoverished nation of Tagus. It state that the new breed of millet which is high in vitamin A, engineered by the international development organization, can help to reduce vitamin A deficiency among people of Tagus. The recommendation made by the author seems viable, however, the line of reasoning provided is weak. The argument is full of unsubstantiated assumptions, unanswered questions and incomplete evidences, which render it unconvincing.

To begin, the international development organization has engineered a new breed of millet which is high in vitamin A, considering deficiency among people of Tagus. They did not provide any substantial evidence that millet rich in vitamin A can actually reduce the deficiency among people. It does not provide any test data that prove that this millet is responsible to increase level of vitamin A in humans. There might be possible that the new breed of millet rich in vitamin A does not interact with human system and thereby does not increase the vitamin A levels among deficient people. The author needs to provide the tested results of the new breed of millet to support his or her stance.

Moreover, the second assumption in this argument is that, while the new type of millet cost more, the subsidies given to farmers for farming the new variety of millet, can mitigate the affect of high cost in the market. This does not provide any evidence that subsidies given to farmers will help local people to buy the new breed of millet over the regular millet. The argument does not provide the data that shows subsidies provided to farmers for engineered millet balances the high cost. To make it more convincing, the author should provide the answer to the question that how the high millet cost and subsidies provided to the farmers will be balanced? and how this will make them farm more new variety of millet.

Furthermore, the author states that as the millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety of millet. While this statement seems convincing, it does not take into account how much millet is consumed in daily meals of people in Tagus. Is this amount is significant enough for people to replace their regular millet with new variety? If people consume only small amount of millet in every meal, will this make any difference in their vitamin A levels? The author needs to provide substantiate examples and clarification for these questions, to make his or her case more convincing to government as well as people of Tagus.

To conclude, the argument in its current state lacks substantial reasoning and evidences. It does not provide answers to the important questions. The government should promote this new type of millet after deliberation over its effect and result. Thus, the author needs to provide more credible information to strengthen his or her case.

Votes
Average: 5.5 (2 votes)
Essay Categories

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 112, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'states'?
Suggestion: states
...in the impoverished nation of Tagus. It state that the new breed of millet which is h...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 558, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'A level' or simply 'levels'?
Suggestion: A level; Levels
...d thereby does not increase the vitamin A levels among deficient people. The author need...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 660, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
...ovided to the farmers will be balanced? and how this will make them farm more new v...
^^^
Line 7, column 477, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'A level' or simply 'levels'?
Suggestion: A level; Levels
...is make any difference in their vitamin A levels? The author needs to provide substantia...
^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, furthermore, however, if, moreover, second, so, then, thus, well, while, as well as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 70.0 55.5748502994 126% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2460.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 491.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01018329939 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70728369723 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72902240136 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.393075356415 0.468620217663 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 782.1 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.5526497001 57.8364921388 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.956521739 119.503703932 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.347826087 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.04347826087 5.70786347227 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 8.20758483034 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => 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: 0.555175009654 0.218282227539 254% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.17719435421 0.0743258471296 238% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.132828107633 0.0701772020484 189% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.31086642492 0.128457276422 242% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.113263232049 0.0628817314937 180% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.3799401198 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.7 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 11 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 491 350
No. of Characters: 2401 1500
No. of Different Words: 184 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.707 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.89 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.664 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 178 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 118 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.318 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.882 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.364 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.373 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.564 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.18 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5