A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pets that had consumed the food experienced vomiting, lethargy, and other signs of illness. After the recall, the pet food company tested samples from the recalled food and determined that all chemicals found in the food were chemicals that are approved for use in pet food. Thus, the recalled food was not responsible for these symptoms, and the company should not devote further resources to the investigation.
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 if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pet that had consumed the food experienced vomiting, lethargy, and other signs of illness. The pet food company came to a conclusion that the recalled food was not responsible for these symptoms, and the company should not devote further resources to the investigation based on the following stated assumptions.
Firstly, the company tested samples from the recalled food and determined that all the chemicals found in the food were chemicals approved for pet food use, assuming that there was no adulteration in a certain lot of food that could have caused the reported symptoms. Secondly, their reasoning is also based on the assumption that all the chemicals were 100% safe for all the kinds of pets, ignoring the fact that the mixing of a certain chemicals with some other could have had certain side effects. Finally, they are assuming that the retailers are selling off all their products before the expiry date, and there is no chance of adulteration at the retailer's end.
If a certain lot of the pet products was adulterated, or say, the food for dogs containing some chemicals was packed under food for cats which could result in severe symptoms, as stated. This could be negligence on the packing division of the company, and such errors are not bound to be caught in the chemical testing of the food products. It may even be the issue of the manufacturing department, who instead of having a fixed proportion of the chemical mixed, could have increased the proportion to a higher amount that could be detrimental on the health of the pet. This is surely valid in the chemical test performed by the company, as that chemical in a certain amount is not dangerous but doesn't imply is safe in a higher amount. In fact, a very serious and thorough investigation in each and every department of the pet company is quite mandatory to reach the correct conclusion and cause of the recall of the products.
Lastly, the pet food company are failing to realize the fact that the adulteration of the food is quite possible after the product is dispatched from their warehouse to the retailers end. It is quite possible that a rival may have done so to mar their reputation, as a 4 million pound retake of pet food would have a deleterious effect on the pet food company's public image and would take years of effort to get back to the previous position. The other fact that they are forgetting to consider is the fact the way the retailer's store their products. Some pet food needs to be stored in damp places, away from the sunlight. The lack of care on the retailer's end could end in spoiled products before the pet owners buy them. It is also likely that they may be selling expired goods by replacing the information tags with a new one.
As a result, all the above assumptions and their counter arguments requires the pet food company to make further investigation in this situation, in order to save the public image of the company from getting impaired. If the company is not at fault all is unicorns and rainbows for the, but if any department of the company is at fault, well they need to apologize publicly for all the damaged caused by them and assure the pet owners that nothing of the kind would ever happen again in the future.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-14 | srujanakeerthi | 49 | view |
| 2019-12-03 | Opak Pulu | 65 | view |
| 2019-11-30 | farhadmoqimi | 29 | view |
| 2019-11-05 | Prudhvi6054 | 63 | view |
| 2019-11-03 | solankis304 | 29 | view |
- "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 pe 58
- Techno Corporation is our top pick for the investment this term. We urge all our clients to invest in this new company. For the first time in ten years, a company that has developed a satellite technology has been approved by the FTA to compete with curre 62
- Some people believe that increasing violence in the media is the cause of increasing violence in our society, especially among children. Others believe that children's peer groups and parental role models are a much more influence on children's behavior. 79
- Mass media and the internet have caused people’s attention spans to get shorter. However, the overall effect has been positive: while people are less able to focus on one thing, they more than make up for it with an enhanced ability to sort through lar 83
- Claim: The emergence of the online "blogosphere" has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States.Reason: When anyone can publish political opinions easily, standards for covering news and political topics will inevitably 62
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 439, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'chemical'?
Suggestion: chemical
...g the fact that the mixing of a certain chemicals with some other could have had certain ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 697, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...n a certain amount is not dangerous but doesnt imply is safe in a higher amount. In fa...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 283, Rule ID: THE_PUNCT[1]
Message: Did you forget something after 'the'?
... fault all is unicorns and rainbows for the, but if any department of the company is...
^^^^
Line 9, column 342, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...artment of the company is at fault, well they need to apologize publicly for all ...
^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'well', 'in fact', 'as a result']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.250793650794 0.25644967241 98% => OK
Verbs: 0.160317460317 0.15541462614 103% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0698412698413 0.0836205057962 84% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0412698412698 0.0520304965353 79% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0238095238095 0.0272364105082 87% => OK
Prepositions: 0.134920634921 0.125424944231 108% => OK
Participles: 0.0571428571429 0.0416121511921 137% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.5877729338 2.79052419416 93% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0253968253968 0.026700313972 95% => OK
Particles: 0.0015873015873 0.001811407834 88% => OK
Determiners: 0.152380952381 0.113004496875 135% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0222222222222 0.0255425247493 87% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00793650793651 0.0127820249294 62% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3341.0 2731.13054187 122% => OK
No of words: 587.0 446.07635468 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69165247019 6.12365571057 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9222030514 4.57801047555 108% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.304940374787 0.378187486979 81% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.238500851789 0.287650121315 83% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.166950596252 0.208842608468 80% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.109028960818 0.135150697306 81% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5877729338 2.79052419416 93% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 207.018472906 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.419080068143 0.469332199767 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 49.8497923316 52.1807786196 96% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 32.6111111111 23.2022227129 141% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.5604046063 57.7814097925 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 185.611111111 141.986410481 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.6111111111 23.2022227129 141% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.777777777778 0.724660767414 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.58251231527 112% => OK
Readability: 56.46119629 51.9672348444 109% => OK
Elegance: 1.96478873239 1.8405768891 107% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.667404446387 0.441005458295 151% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.171712755143 0.135418324435 127% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.105429099969 0.0829849096947 127% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.679248502886 0.58762219726 116% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.141456213217 0.147661913831 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.340952096622 0.193483328276 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.166765327364 0.0970749176394 172% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.58035544259 0.42659136922 136% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0578697880097 0.0774707102158 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.532564486876 0.312017818177 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.124179198489 0.0698173142475 178% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.33743842365 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 15.0 14.657635468 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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: 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.