Paleo diets, in which one eats how early hominids (human ancestors) did, are becoming increasingly popular. Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food, especially bone broth, a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours. They believe it has many health-promoting nutrients, such as cartilage, which can heal our joints, and chondroitin, which promotes nerve regeneration. Skeptics point out that ingested cartilage can’t replenish cartilage in your knees or elbows and ingested chondroitin doesn’t make our brains any healthier. Yet, there is strong anecdotal evidence that people who consume bone broth have fewer metabolic and inflammatory diseases than those who don’t. Therefore, ancient humans knew something about our physiology that we don’t, and that by emulating the way they ate, we can cure many chronic illnesses.
Even though the argument takes into consideration and opposing viewpoint, which is very beneficial to have a strong argument by fighting an opposing point, the argument is relatively week in terms of its ideas and juxtaposition of its thought processes. There is some truth into Paleo diets and deriving from early human ages where human ancestors used to follow these diets, however there is no strong idea denoting that current diet systems are not adequate to having a good health and immune system. Moreover, the viewpoint that ancient humans consuming bone broth have fewer inflammatory diseases and metabolic disease is anecdotal and therefore could be easily coincidental or consequential.
There is no real reasoning, proof or scientific argument going into bone broth being directly related to a strong immune system or avoidance of diseases. This argument, though at first glance seems adequate to come at a complete informed conclusion, it still has hindrances. It says proponents claim that humans drinking bone broth give promising nutrient and improvement of health however there are no scientific facts or research associated with the argument and the argument does not follow its natural flow of logic. As enticing it is to believe in the benifits of bone broth, the argument is solely based on people's experience that bone broth helps them feel stronger. However, this personal evidences are falling short to corroborate the argument in favor of bone broth as it is very easy to adulterate such opinions and personal opinions change over time as people have more experience and more information dynamically changes with time. Additionally there is nothing that refutes other diets, such as keto diet or intermittent fasting does not achieve the same results. In this day and age of modern science and nutrition based science that test a lot of results and compare them, it is futile to argue that bone broth based paleo diets are the only successful diets and rest of them are obsolete. It is important to keep in mind that this argument argues for one point and does not refute and opposite or counter claims. Finally, even with the personal reasoning and human experience, it does not include the sample size of anecdotes or the number of interviews it conducted before creatting a strong argument in favor of paleo diets.
Hence, in conclusion the argument is fallacious as it relies on an unknown sample size, bases itself on anecdotal reasoning and does not counter or refute any other arguments and diets that are more strong and germain.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-23 | Ruhani | 59 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Mayuresh08 | 70 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Akash Konar | 55 | view |
| 2023-08-13 | fabjaved | 62 | view |
| 2023-07-16 | hello_kratnesh101 | 47 | view |
- Paleo diets in which one eats how early hominids human ancestors did are becoming increasingly popular Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food especially bone broth a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours They believe 63
- Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader it is not as important as a leader s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree wi 66
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 421 350
No. of Characters: 2112 1500
No. of Different Words: 212 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.53 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.017 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.603 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 150 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 115 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 32.385 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.723 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.615 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.374 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.374 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.112 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 946, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Additionally,
...ormation dynamically changes with time. Additionally there is nothing that refutes other die...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, hence, however, if, moreover, so, still, therefore, in conclusion, 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: 1.0 12.9520958084 8% => OK
Conjunction : 28.0 11.1786427146 250% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2143.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 421.0 441.139720559 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09026128266 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52971130743 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66375966902 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.522565320665 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 690.3 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
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: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 32.0 22.8473053892 140% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 51.5594675906 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 164.846153846 119.503703932 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.3846153846 23.324526521 139% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.92307692308 5.70786347227 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 5.15768463074 58% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.149369608845 0.218282227539 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0585024610792 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0431437264222 0.0701772020484 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0891376832846 0.128457276422 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0530785766974 0.0628817314937 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.7 14.3799401198 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.0 48.3550499002 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.197005988 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.27 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 11.1389221557 133% => OK
text_standard: 19.0 11.9071856287 160% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.