A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal re

Essay topics:

A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal receive little to no professional dental care, while people in suburban areas in the United States see a dentist an average of 1.25 times per year. Thus, regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay.

Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.

In this argument, the author claims that between the children of Nepal and the United States, Nepal children have a low tooth decay rate than of the United States. To support his view, the author cites the following facts about tooth decay: (1) Regular dental care is not helpful because Nepal has little or no professional dental care but still, their children's tooth decay rate is lower than that of the United States. (2) Children of the suburb area of US should have lower tooth decay rate as they visit more frequently to the dentist. However, close scrutiny of these facts declares that none o...

*** The full content of this essay is available to VIP readers

Votes
Average: 8.9 (3 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2023-07-16 AaronFernandes 60 view
2023-04-09 Aaishani De 66 view
2023-01-18 writingishard 59 view
2022-06-24 Nalu00 53 view
2021-08-27 Adz12345 53 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user asif rokoni :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 546, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'scrutiny'.
Suggestion: scrutiny
...ore frequently to the dentist. However, close scrutiny of these facts declares that none of th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 480, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'living the healthiest'.
Suggestion: living the healthiest
...its light but people of those areas are living healthiest kind of life. From the authors perspect...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 521, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...iving healthiest kind of life. From the authors perspective swarming with disease. F...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 249, Rule ID: PHRASE_REPETITION[1]
Message: This phrase is duplicated. You should probably leave only 'no real'.
Suggestion: no real
...s are rife with baseless arguments with no real no real evidence or local survey. So, those sta...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 231, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...le and refutable. To be more convincing, the author should provide more informati...
^^
Line 9, column 336, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...result - to justify his/her hypothesis.
^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, in short, kind of, such as, to sum up

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2231.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 444.0 441.139720559 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02477477477 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.5903493882 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52072735649 2.78398813304 91% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497747747748 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 689.4 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7164331486 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.421052632 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3684210526 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.52631578947 5.70786347227 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.266298550545 0.218282227539 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0829918852473 0.0743258471296 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0809617841836 0.0701772020484 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142395648346 0.128457276422 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100967399493 0.0628817314937 161% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 98.500998004 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?

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

Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.

argument 1 -- OK

argument 2 -- OK

argument 3 -- OK
----------------

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 446 350
No. of Characters: 2170 1500
No. of Different Words: 214 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.596 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.865 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.446 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 107 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 64 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.474 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.069 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.632 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.339 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.552 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.17 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5