In the given argument, the author has made claims about a pet food company that had to recall 4 million pounds of pet food due to an increased number of complaints. The pets were reported to suffer from several signs of illnesses namely vomiting, lethargy, etc. It retested their samples and determined that the chemicals used were all approved for use in pet food. The author also claims that the pet food company is not responsible for the issue and is not going to devote any more time or resources in further investigation.
Honestly, the given claims are too vague to reach a conclusion. The given claims do not provide enough evidence for a reader to trust the company's stance and hence the above claims stand unwarranted.
We need to do a careful analysis of the given claims and provide suitable evidence to substantiate them. Let's start by talking about the pet food company itself. Nowhere has the author talked about the number and type of pet food items that the company is producing. The food items were for some specific animals like cats, dogs, parrots, rabbits or were it something generic that s edible for all the pets.
Next, it is not described that different pets are likely to have different choices, tastes, and different metabolisms so it is questionable to give the same pet food to all of them. They are likely to fall sick and feel lethargic if such a scenario happens. For instance, one pet food item may be adored by cats but disliked by rabbits and gunnie pigs and at the same harmful for a dog's digestive system. So, the pet food should be made more pet-specific.
Also, the complaints here that are being talked about do not reflect the numbers, no enumeration has been done on the variety of pet animals. How many complaints were from people who had dogs, how many from cat-owning people, how many from rabbits and so on. It is essential to monitor the number to work out an action plan for future.
Next, the recalled samples were re-tested by the pet food company but nowhere has the credibility of the resources been mentioned. Which organization monitored this testing? Is the testing procedure coherent to the norms laid by the Government Food Organisation? Did they do the testing themselves? Well, if yes than there is a great chance that in order to preserve the name of their company, they have given out fake results and are more likely not to accept their folly. That would bring a bad name to the company and their business would suffer and witness a downfall.
Hence, substantial evidence is required to answer the questions that have been raised above and we need to carefully examine each in order to reach a stance where we can state whether the pet food company is truly at fault or are they free of this malicious act. The evidence will help us to reach the culmination of the argument stated above and provide a clear picture of the intentions of the pet food company.
- "Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the same time period, most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned wit 23
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 58
- The following appeared in a letter from the faculty committee to the president of Seatown University:A study conducted at nearby Oceania University showed that faculty retention is higher when professors are offered free tuition at the university for thei 50
- Claim: Even though young people often receive the advice to “follow your dreams,” more emphasis should be placed on picking worthy goals.Reason: Many people’s dreams are inherently selfish.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which 50
- Que :Over the past two years , the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarders has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store Owner believe that the decrease in their business is due to the 73
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-argument-task-essays/pet-food-company-r…
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 516 350
No. of Characters: 2358 1500
No. of Different Words: 246 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.766 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.57 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.418 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 154 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 111 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.091 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.542 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.298 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.53 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.121 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 106, Rule ID: LETS_LET[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Let's'?
Suggestion: Let's
...suitable evidence to substantiate them. Lets start by talking about the pet food com...
^^^^
Line 4, column 351, Rule ID: WERE_VBB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'where' or 'we'?
Suggestion: where; we
...ls like cats, dogs, parrots, rabbits or were it something generic that s edible for ...
^^^^
Line 6, column 381, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a dog' or simply 'dogs'?
Suggestion: a dog; dogs
...gunnie pigs and at the same harmful for a dogs digestive system. So, the pet food shou...
^^^^^^
Line 10, column 574, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ss would suffer and witness a downfall. Hence, substantial evidence is required ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, honestly, if, may, so, well, for instance, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 11.1786427146 179% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2421.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 516.0 441.139720559 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.69186046512 5.12650576532 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76609204519 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5017473312 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.476744186047 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 766.8 705.55239521 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.0262677452 57.8364921388 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.84 119.503703932 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.64 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.96 5.70786347227 52% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.457156572056 0.218282227539 209% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136266734532 0.0743258471296 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.125781660609 0.0701772020484 179% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.219615797434 0.128457276422 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.139966900633 0.0628817314937 223% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 14.3799401198 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.92 12.5979740519 79% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.69 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.