A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountai

The study that compares children from mountainous regions of Nepal and suburb regions of the USA indicates that tooth decay in both group differs because of ineffectiveness of tooth care in the USA. This argument is flawed because of the following reasons; first arguments lacks of quantification, second, it is based on wrong assumption and third, it provides no other details to explain the difference in the level of tooth decay between two groups.

First of all, the health of teeth depends not only on dental care but also on nutrition and eating habits of people. There is a possibility that in Nepal children might eat less sugar or sugar concentrated foods than children in the USA do. Because, sugar makes enamel layer of tooth more and more thinner and susceptible to outside effects. On the other hand, there is some acidic combinations that contributes to the durability of tooth. For example, when the concentration of iodin is higher in the food and in the water then it improves the life of teeth. In order to make the argument more sound, study must show more detailed information regarding the nutritional an drinking habits of both Nepali and the US children.

Secondly, the study wrongly concludes that the dental care is not effective in the US children, since they see a dentist 1.25 times per year. But the study fails to back this fact, by not showing the countrywide standards of seeing dentist per year. For example, if a child, based on standard procedure, must see a dentist 4 times a year but he or she visits a doctor only 1.25 times, then it is true that the dental care is not going to be effective. If, the study offered this fact then the argument might sound more applicable and unambiguous. Therefore, the claim about the inefficiency of dental care is not justified.

Third, the quality of dental care, that are assumed to be low quality could be checked in a different way. What if the Nepali children receive the same dental care from the same dentists what will be the result? If that prolonged the durability and improved the health of Nepali children than we could decide that the healthcare level is not so lower in the suburb areas of the US as it is assumed. To, strengthen its claim, study must provide evidence that the health care specialists of suburb areas of the US were unsuccessful in other areas of the country, or in the region of Nepal children.

In conclusion, the argument claiming the regular dental care is not effective in preventing tooth decay is flawed because of following reasons; it does not compare the eating and nutritional habits and facts of two child group, does not provide the standard of doctor visits per year and does not show the result of dental care on Nepali children. The argument could be more sound if the study provided at least one of the aforementioned facts.