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.
While it is possible that the pet food was solely responsible for causing illness to the pets, it is also probable that there were other reasons for their illness. For example, if the sick pets drank contaminated water, this could also have caused their ailments. Again, the number of complaints the pet company received is also important. If the number is quite large in comparison to the amount of food sold, then it is only logical to assume that the food was somewhat responsible. But if the number is small, then it maybe safe to say that the complaints were apocryphal.
The argument doesn't provide any information on the sample size used by the pet food company to determine the chemicals used in the food. But the sample size is essential to fully understand the effects the food had on the pets' health. If the sample size was small, it is possible that the chosen samples did have the approved chemicals, but most of the 4 million pounds of food recalled by the company, actually didn't. Moreover, there is no information on whether the tests were carried out in the proper manner by an impartial party. In case they were not, the results can be dubious.
There is a chance that the chemicals used were not of the proper quality. Using low-quality chemicals could have led to the problems the pets suffered.
Lastly, in the event that high-quality, approved chemicals were indeed used in the food and yet it caused detrimental effects to the health of the pets, then there should be proper investigation on these chemicals that are presumed safe. Perhaps it will lead to some important discovery about them so that we can accurately determine if they are really safe.
| 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 |
- The first step to self-knowledge is rejection of the familiar.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your p 58
- Company management should conduct routine monitoring of all employee e-mail correspondence. Such monitoring will reduce the waste of resources such as time and system capacity, as well as protect the company from lawsuits. 50
- 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 foo 54
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 50
- The following argument was made in a newspaper editorial:“The autonomy of any country is based on the strength of its borders; if the number of illegal immigrants entering a country cannot be checked, both its economy and national identity are endangere 41
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 14, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...aints were apocryphal. The argument doesnt provide any information on the sample s...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 223, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'pets'' or 'pet's'?
Suggestion: pets'; pet's
...erstand the effects the food had on the pets health. If the sample size was small, i...
^^^^
Line 3, column 413, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... food recalled by the company, actually didnt. Moreover, there is no information on w...
^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'moreover', 'really', 'so', 'then', 'while', 'for example']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.209375 0.25644967241 82% => OK
Verbs: 0.165625 0.15541462614 107% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0875 0.0836205057962 105% => OK
Adverbs: 0.075 0.0520304965353 144% => OK
Pronouns: 0.040625 0.0272364105082 149% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.11875 0.125424944231 95% => OK
Participles: 0.040625 0.0416121511921 98% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.55060207258 2.79052419416 91% => OK
Infinitives: 0.028125 0.026700313972 105% => OK
Particles: 0.003125 0.001811407834 173% => OK
Determiners: 0.13125 0.113004496875 116% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.01875 0.0255425247493 73% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.003125 0.0127820249294 24% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1682.0 2731.13054187 62% => OK
No of words: 292.0 446.07635468 65% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.7602739726 6.12365571057 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.57801047555 90% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.321917808219 0.378187486979 85% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.222602739726 0.287650121315 77% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.164383561644 0.208842608468 79% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.106164383562 0.135150697306 79% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55060207258 2.79052419416 91% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 207.018472906 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.469332199767 107% => OK
Word variations: 49.2755077535 52.1807786196 94% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 20.039408867 70% => OK
Sentence length: 20.8571428571 23.2022227129 90% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.6866804901 57.7814097925 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.142857143 141.986410481 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8571428571 23.2022227129 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.857142857143 0.724660767414 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 3.58251231527 84% => OK
Readability: 43.1174168297 51.9672348444 83% => OK
Elegance: 1.31111111111 1.8405768891 71% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.507649899721 0.441005458295 115% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.197374357878 0.135418324435 146% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0864546093152 0.0829849096947 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.653605493264 0.58762219726 111% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.146338439044 0.147661913831 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.23907067436 0.193483328276 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.121316431122 0.0970749176394 125% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.483986576369 0.42659136922 113% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.069457033742 0.0774707102158 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.348011800316 0.312017818177 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0987285617746 0.0698173142475 141% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 12.0 14.657635468 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
More content wanted. For issue essays, around 450 words, for argument essays, around 400 words.
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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: This is not the final score. 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.