A recent study reported that pet owners have longer, healthier lives on average than do people who own no pets. Specifically, dog owners tend to have a lower incidence of heart disease. In light of these findings, Sherwood Hospital should form a partnersh

Essay topics:

A recent study reported that pet owners have longer, healthier lives on average than do people who own no pets. Specifically, dog owners tend to have a lower incidence of heart disease. In light of these findings, Sherwood Hospital should form a partnership with Sherwood Animal Shelter to institute an adopt-a-dog program. The program would encourage dog ownership for patients recovering from heart disease, which should reduce these patients' chance of experiencing continuing heart problems and also reduce their need for ongoing treatment. As a further benefit, the publicity about the program would encourage more people to adopt pets from the shelter. And that will reduce the incidence of heart disease in the general population.
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 for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted

In spite of interesting findings propose the positive impact of pet ownership on the quality of human being and reduction of heart disease rate, the suggestion of argument citing the necessity of forming partnership between Sherwood Hospital and Sherwood Animal Shelter for the purpose of adopting pets in order to assist patients suffering from heard diseases and also decrease the incidence of heart disease in the society is not valid. The close scrutiny of the argument reveals several flaws and weaknesses as the matter of adopting pets and specially dogs does not serve as an individual treatment practice to cure heart disease patients.

In the first place, we should take many determinants of the heart diseases into account. Heart disease one of the serious problems of the contemporary societies; it occurs due to factors such as sedentary, high risk behaviors, fault nutrition and various types of stresses. Therefore, the optimal way to tackle this issue and improve the level of wellbeing is to fight the causes. However, other supportive and preventive manners like the contribution of pet adoption might be effective either. The author does not elucidate the standing of the pet adoption in conjunction with other treatment practices; thus, since the argument lacks the sufficient data, no concrete conclusion can be made.

Secondly, the argument seems in favor of the pets than patients, because the tone and scope of the words advocate further adoption of pets from animal shelters. However, there is no guarantee if patients comply with this policy, they are likely to have full recovery from their illnesses. Unless patients do not observe other health-related points, the adoption of pets as a powerful treatment is ruled out.

Thirdly, albeit being aware of the effectiveness of animal adoption on health and reduction of heart disease is promising news to encourage public to take care of them; but still as long as people do not address their health from many perspectives, the pet adoption does not work individually.

In conclusion, in order to improve the health standards in the community a comprehensive guidance should be delivered including a wide range of healthy suggestions. The present argument is a tenuous guide as it fails to refer to other major rehabilitation measures along with the issue of adopting pets.

Votes
Average: 6.5 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2013-11-11 soran942 65 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user soran942 :

Comments

Argument 1 -- OK

Argument 2 -- Not OK

Argument 3 -- Not really. We cannot assume that the ongoing costs of treatment will be reduced because heart disease patients are encouraged to take the adopt-a-dog program.

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 378 350
No. of Characters: 1933 1500
No. of Different Words: 209 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.409 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.114 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.742 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 145 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 88 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 29.077 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.61 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.769 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.348 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.624 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5