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.
The facts given in the argument are incomplete and do not present a full view of the given situation. Further information is needed to draw meaningful conclusions.
Firstly, it is given that children living in the suburban region in the United States have more tooth decays than children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal. Instead of dental care, maybe the kind of food consumed in these areas can give us an indication of why such a discrepancy is taking place. It is possible that children in suburban areas are consuming more starchy or sugary food than children living in mountain regions. This invariably is causing teeth to decay faster.
Secondly, there might be some ancient and home remedies available from plants and herbs of the Himalayan region to the children of Nepal to boost oral hygiene which may not be readily available to children of the United States. For example, "Neem" leaves are commonly found in Nepal and are used as a tongue cleaner after meals. In United States, dental floss is a preferred means to remove leftover food from the mouth. A difference of habits and methods may be the reason why regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay.
Thirdly, absence of regulated and professional dental care in Nepal might be a reason that people have no records to measure how frequently dentists are visited. Thus, it might seem that people in Suburban United States see a dental care professional more. This may not truly indicate if regular dental care is helpful in preventing tooth decay or not.
Other causes such as genetics are nowhere mentioned in the argument which could indicate whether regular dental care is beneficial or there are some other factors involved. Hence, more information is needed to evaluate the facts mentioned in the given statements.
| 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 |
- 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 large quan 50
- These days more and more people move away from the area where they were born and brought up when they become adults Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your o 56
- Governments should invest as much in the arts as they do in the military 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 support 50
- 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 rec 52
- Educators should find out what students want included in the curriculum and then offer it to them 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 58
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 305 350
No. of Characters: 1485 1500
No. of Different Words: 152 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.179 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.869 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.478 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 114 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 77 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 51 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 26 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.333 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.888 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.334 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.596 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.077 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus, for example, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 28.8173652695 38% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 55.5748502994 65% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1536.0 2260.96107784 68% => OK
No of words: 305.0 441.139720559 69% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.03606557377 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.56307096286 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61077090103 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 204.123752495 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.501639344262 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 489.6 705.55239521 69% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.4762453253 57.8364921388 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.4 119.503703932 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3333333333 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 5.70786347227 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.352289706976 0.218282227539 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.109073436416 0.0743258471296 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.164705753074 0.0701772020484 235% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164410648379 0.128457276422 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.170569099773 0.0628817314937 271% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.2 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 98.500998004 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.