Prompt: The following appeared in an article in a health and fitness magazine: “Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good health and that it is completely free of bacteria. Residents of Saluda, the small town where the water is bottled, are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Even though Saluda Natural Spring Water may seem expensive, drinking it instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health.” Essay: The argument that Residents of Saluda should be buying Saluda Natural Spring Water instead of drinking tap water as an investment of good health fails to acknowledge several key elements. The author of this argument states that there are laboratory studies showing that Saluda Natural Spring water is healthy water, and that the residents of the town are hospitalized less frequently than national average. However, this alone does not constitute logical evidence in favor of the recommendation cited above. The author fails to take into account studies of tap water and demographical characteristics of the residents that might be addressed in order to strengthen the argument. One of the most fundamentals flaws with this argument stems from a lack of information about the properties of the town’s tap water. The argument seems to assume that tap water does not contain the same quantity of healthy minerals found in the spring water or that it might have some bacteria and therefore arrives at the conclusion that tap water is not as healthy as Saluda Natural Spring Water. It is entirely possible that tap water is as healthy as the spring water, and therefore the recommendation of buying spring water instead would have been weaken. Had the argument included such data regarding studies about properties of Saluda’s tap water showing the lack of minerals or the existence of some bacteria corroborating the argument’s conclusion, a stronger case for the recommendation in favor of buying spring water would have been made. Even if the argument persuasively featured information about tap water, several logical leaps would still be required for this argument to be considered sound. For example, the author claims that Saluda’s residents are less frequently hospitalized than the national average. However there is now proof that this piece of evidence would necessarily lead to the other. Perhaps, Saluda’s residents have healthier habits than the national average. For example, they may practice more sports or eat healthier. Furthermore the argument omits to mention the characteristics of the residents, the population in Saluda might be younger than the average. Saluda may be a town built around a university where most people are students in their mid-20s, who have fewer illnesses or just prefer to return their home town when they are ill. This type of information should be addressed for the argument to be more convincing. As the argument now stands, it does not read as either persuasive or cogent. Improvements, including laboratory studies of tap water and information claiming that the population in Saluda is representative of the national average population would certainly make this argument a better and more convincing piece. Words: 439 Thanks! Regards

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Back to Forum

Create Topic

Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains seve

1 2 3

Sajjad1994

GRE Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Nov 2016

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 16,753

Own Kudos:

51,993

Given Kudos: 6,342

GPA: 3.62

Products:

Posts: 16,753

Kudos: 51,993

25 Nov 2022, 08:27

Kudos

Bookmarks

AWA Score: 5.5 - 6 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.

Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.

Vocabulary and word expression: 4/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!

Good Luck

sarveshghoriwala

Sajjad1994 / bb

Could you please help rate my essay?

Thanks a lot!

Essay:
The argument in the article concludes that drinking Saluda Natural Spring Water is good for health, however, this argument is flawed since it jumps to the conclusion without properly analyzing the facts. The gaps in the line of reasoning include the questions of whether the presence of minerals in this water is exclusive, whether the absence of all bacteria is good, and whether the low hospitalization rate is due to the water.

First, it is possible that other bottled water, which is not as expensive, also contains the minerals required for good health. In such a case, the presence of such minerals in Saluda Natural Spring Water does not substantiate the article's claim. Moreover, it may even be the case that the daily requirement of these minerals are already met through some other means, like a normal diet, such that the minerals in the water do not have any additional benefits.

Second, it is stated that the water is completely free of bacteria. While some species of bacteria may be harmful and may lead to diseases, not all bacteria is bad. There are some good bacteria that may be requried for the normal functioning of the body. If the water is devoid of any bacteria, it may actually be harmful to one's health.

Third, the lower than average hospitalization rate of the residents of Saluda is used to support the claim that Saluda's water is good for health. There are several possibilities that make this piece of evidence redundant in analyzing the effect of Saluda Natural Spring Water. One such case may be that the residents of Saluda do not actually drink this water, instead they consume some other brand of water. Another scenario could be that the small town does not have any hospitals nearby, because of which residents avoid going to hospitals, leading to lower than average hospitalization rates.

The above points are reasons that one should be sceptical about the article's claim and should take it with a grain of salt. Thus, before considering that the water is a wise investment in good health, a further analysis should be done on the impact of the minerals, effect of the absence of bacteria, and reasons for low hospitalization rate.

bellsprout25

Joined: 05 Sep 2022

Last visit: 16 Dec 2022

Posts: 6

Given Kudos: 1

Posts: 6

Kudos: 0

01 Dec 2022, 15:39

Kudos

Bookmarks

hello! can i please have someone grade my essay attempt?

“Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good health and that it is completely free of bacteria. Residents of Saluda, the small town where the water is bottled, are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Even though Saluda Natural Spring Water may seem expensive, drinking it instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health.”

The argument suggests that Saluda Natural Spring water is a better alternative for drinking water than tap water. The argument cites as evidence that residents of Saluda are hospitalized less frequently than the national average and because Saluda Natural Spring Water contains minerals necessary for good health and is free of bacteria. As stated in this way, the argument is weak and unconvincing for three reasons.

First, the argument assumes that just because Saluda water is bottled in Saluda, that the residents drink actually drink that water instead of tap water or other sources of water. There is no definitive proof that residents of that town actually consume Saluda Natural Spring water, at what rate, how they might use the water, and at what percentage of total water consumption. Without this information, the argument is severely weakened. In order to strengthen this argument, the author needs to clearly establish the line of reasoning that residents of Saluda actually consume Saluda Natural Spring water.

In addition, the author does not provide a clear causal relationship that Saluda Water is the reason that Saluda's residents are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Even if the author is able to prove that Saluda's residents drink more Saluda Natural Spring water than the national average, there is no definitive evidence that this is the reason why its residents are healthier or hospitalized less frequently than the national average. The author fails to consider other possibilities for why Saluda's residents are hospitalized less frequently than the national average such as the fact that the town might be younger and healthier in general than the national average. Perhaps another reason may be that residents of Saluda are very conscious about their diet and exercise. The author needs to take into consideration these factors in order to make a more well-reasoned argument.

Moreover, the author fails to consider one vital and key point of comparison - whether the tap water does or does not contain the minerals necessary for good health and is free of bacteria. The argument simply assumes that Saluda Natural Spring Water is superior because it does contain essential minerals and is free of bacteria, without providing a point of comparison. If tap water indeed has all the same minerals and is still bacteria-free, this severely weakens the author's argument. In order to strengthen this argument, the author needs to evaluate the tap water and prove that tap water is substantially worse than Saluda Natural Spring Water.

As the author has not addressed the weaknesses laid out above, the argument leaves the reader with more questions than answers. In order to evaluate the strength of an argument, all key factors, considerations, and assumptions must be clear and substantiated. Without establishing evidence that Saluda residents actually drink the Saluda Spring water, that the Saluda Spring water is actually the reason for low rates of hospitalization, and that Saluda Spring Water is superior to tap water, this argument is unsubstantiated and is left up to debate.

Sajjad1994

GRE Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Nov 2016

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 16,753

Own Kudos:

51,993

Given Kudos: 6,342

GPA: 3.62

Products:

Posts: 16,753

Kudos: 51,993

02 Dec 2022, 08:37

Kudos

Bookmarks

AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.

Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.

Vocabulary and word expression: 3/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!

Good Luck

bellsprout25

donu

Joined: 11 Jun 2022

Last visit: 15 Feb 2024

Posts: 40

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 51

Posts: 40

Kudos: 5

05 Mar 2023, 22:26

Kudos

Bookmarks

Please evaluate my essay:

The argument presented in the magazine claims that Saluda Natural Spring Water is a wise investment in good health for the residents of Saluda because it contains many of the essential minerals and is 100 percent free of bacteria and beacuse the rate of hospitalization in the city is less than the national average. This argument is weak and unconvincing because it makes several assumptions about a phenonmenon and fails to consider other factors that are essential in evaluating its overall conclusion.

First, the argument is flawed because it suggests that residents of Saluda, the small town in which the water is bottled, are less frequently hospitalized than the nation's average. This claim is weak because the argument does not detail whether the residents of the city currently consume the water. Perhaps the water may only be bottled in Saluda and not actually consumed by its citizens. Therefore, the argument cannot convincingly draw a relationship between the consumption of the spring water and the hospitalization rate in Saluda. Even if residents did indeed consume the spring water, that relationship, which the argument seeks to establish, is unconvincing because the lower hospitalization rate in Saluda could be attributed to other factors that could promote health in Saluda such as better heath care facilities, lower pollution, a higher rate of obedience to road laws, etc. The argument could be signifcantly strengthened by presenting research that shows that the residents of Saluda drink the spring water and that minerals in the water cause a decreased likelihood of hospitalization.

In addition, the argument is flawed because it concludes that drinking Saluda Natural Spring Water instead of tap water is an investment in wise good health without differentiating the characteristics of tap water and the spring water. If tap water is not signifcantly worse than the spring water then the difference in the return on the investment of drinking tap and that of drinking spring water may be negligible, making it an unwise investment to purchase an expensive product that does not add much more value. One could also argue against the claim that drinking the spring water is a wise investment in good health if the water is signifcantly more expensive than tap water. If an individual spends $400 on yearly consumption of tap water but will spend $1200 yearly on Saluda Natural Spring Water, drinking the spring water will reduce the individuals disposable income by an additonal $800, money that could be used to cover medical expenses and promote the health of the individual. In such an example, drinking the spring water would be counterproductive to the resident's health. The argument could be made clearer by highlighting that the spring water is significantly better than tap water in terms of health benefits and by showing that drinking tap water in Saluda is detrimental to one's health.

In conclusion, the argument in the health-and-fitness magazine is deeply flawed because of the aformentioned reasons. It can be greatly bolstered by offering cogent evidence to support the numerous assumptions it made. However, because it failed to do so, the argument is weak, unconvincing, and open to debate.

Sajjad1994

GRE Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Nov 2016

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 16,753

Own Kudos:

51,993

Given Kudos: 6,342

GPA: 3.62

Products:

Posts: 16,753

Kudos: 51,993

07 Mar 2023, 11:43

Kudos

Bookmarks

AWA Score: 5.5 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 5.5/6

The response is well-organized, with a clear introduction and conclusion, and each paragraph focusing on a specific point. The ideas flow logically, and the writer uses transition words effectively to connect ideas within and between paragraphs.

Paragraph structure and formation: 5.5/6

Each paragraph has a clear topic sentence and provides supporting evidence and analysis to support the main point. The paragraphs are well-organized and focused, with no irrelevant information.

Vocabulary and word expression: 5.5/6

The writer uses a variety of vocabulary and sentence structures effectively to convey their ideas. The language is clear and concise, and there are no major errors in grammar or word usage. However, some minor errors in punctuation and word choice are present.

Do not post your same essay twice

donu

vijayjd88

Joined: 25 Dec 2019

Last visit: 26 Mar 2025

Posts: 18

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 58

Posts: 18

Kudos: 4

21 May 2023, 08:48

Kudos

Bookmarks

carcass GMATNinja or any other expert. It would be great help if my AWA Essay could be evaluated.

The question that I got in my Official Mock is as under :-

" Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good health and is completely free of bacteria. Residents of Saluda, the small town where the water is bottled, are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Even though Saluda Natural Spring Water may seem expensive, drinking it instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health"

The essay that I wrote is as under :-

The argument states that drinking Saluda Natural Spring Water instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health. Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors based on which it could be evaluated. This conclusion is based on the premise that the residents of Saluda, where the water is bottled, are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. However , this conclusion relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore , the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws that are enumerated in succeeding paragraphs.

First, the argument relates the lesser rate of hospitalization of the residents of Saluda, where the Saluda Natural Spring Water is bottled, with the health benefits of the water in Saluda. In doing this, the argument readily assumes that there are no other factors to play in the lesser rate of hosptalization of the residents of Saluda. For all we know, it might be the better Air Quality in Saluda that has played a role in the lesser rate of hospitalization. Also, the genetic make up of the people of Saluda could have a role to play in the lesser rate of hospitalization. Since the argument fails to explicitly state these assumptions, it seems weak and poorly reasoned. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that there are no other factors other than water that play a role in the lower than average hospitalization rate of Saluda.

Secondly, the argument generalizes that what works for the residents of Saluda would work for everyone. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as it is not necessary that what is true in one case will hold true in all cases. Is Saluda representative of every other place in the country? The evaluation of the aforementioned question is necessary to evaluate the soundness of the argument. The argument would be more logical , if the author had provided evidence to substantiate the claim that Saluda Natural Spring Water is the reason for the good health of the residents of Saluda.

In addition, another question that needs to be answered is if the source of water consumption of the residents of Saluda and the source of water for Saluda Natural Spring Water is same? If yes, then the argument would be stregthened. If not, then the argument falls flat.

Finally, the argument would be more convincing if it provided clear evidence stating the water to be the reason for good health and lesser hospitalization rate of the residents of the town Saluda. For example, if a newspaper article comes up with a report on the excellent air quality of the Saluda, compared with other places in the country, the argument would be seriously weakened. On the contrary , if the argument provided some evidence , may be in the form of a survey of medical experts, the findings of which attributes the lesser rate of hospitalization of the residents of Saluda to the consumption of water from the source of Saluda Natural Spring Water, then the argument would be logical and convincing.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the afore-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. In order to assess the merits of Saluda Natural Spring Water, it is important to have full knowledge of all contributing factors for the good health of the residents of the town Saluda. For exemple, the argument could be considerably stregthened if the author provided evidence to atrribute the good health of the residents of Saluda to the water source from which Saluda Natural Spring Water is bottled. Without this information the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Thanks in anticipation.

Regards

Sajjad1994

GRE Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Nov 2016

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 16,753

Own Kudos:

51,993

[1]

Given Kudos: 6,342

GPA: 3.62

Products:

Posts: 16,753

Kudos: 51,993

[1]

22 May 2023, 07:40

Kudos

Bookmarks

AWA Score: 6 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 5.5
The essay demonstrates good coherence and connectivity overall. The ideas flow logically from one paragraph to another, and each paragraph focuses on a specific point. However, there are a few instances where the connections between ideas could be strengthened for smoother transitions.

Word structure: 5.5
The word structure is generally strong, with varied sentence structures and appropriate word choices. However, there are a few instances where sentences could be rephrased for better clarity or precision.

Paragraph structure and formation: 6
The essay follows a clear paragraph structure, with each paragraph addressing a specific aspect of the argument. The ideas within paragraphs are well-developed and supported with reasoning and examples.

Language and Grammar: 6
The language and grammar usage are strong, with accurate sentence construction and effective communication of ideas. There are no significant grammatical errors or issues that hinder comprehension.

Vocabulary and word expression: 5.5
The essay demonstrates a good range of vocabulary and word expression. There is effective use of terminology related to the topic. However, there could be a slightly higher level of sophistication and precision in word choice to enhance the overall impact of the essay.

Overall, the essay receives a score of 5.5 out of 6 for Coherence and connectivity, Word structure, Language and Grammar, and Vocabulary and word expression. The Paragraph structure and formation receive a score of 6 out of 6.

Please do not post just randomly, follow the posting rules next time. Follow the link below.

https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.html

vijayjd88

yipmewmew

Joined: 26 May 2021

Last visit: 15 Jul 2025

Posts: 227

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 791

Location: India

Schools: Ross '26 (D)

GMAT 1: 640 Q44 V33 Verified score

GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42 Verified score

Products:

Schools: Ross '26 (D)

GMAT 2: 730 Q48 V42 Verified score

Posts: 227

Kudos: 83

19 Jul 2023, 06:52

Kudos

Bookmarks

Hi Sajjad1994, pls rate my essay

Q-“Laboratory studies show that Saluda Natural Spring Water contains several of the minerals necessary for good health and that it is completely free of bacteria. Residents of Saluda, the small town where the water is bottled, are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Even though Saluda Natural Spring Water may seem expensive, drinking it instead of tap water is a wise investment in good health.”
The argument states that drinking Saluda Natural Spring Water is beneficial and should be considered as a wise investment in one’s good health, using the support that residents of Saluda, where this water is bottled are hospitalized less frequently than the national average. Stated in this way, the argument reveals examples of poor reasoning and fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it could have been evaluated. There are assumptions galore in this argument for which no clear evidence has been provided. Hence this argument has very weak legs to stand upon.
First, the argument very conveniently assumes that the reason for the lesser than national average hospitalization frequency for the residents of Saluda is Saluda Natural Spring Water. This statement is a stretch as we do not know anything about the residents of Saluda. For instance, it could very well be the case that residents of Saluda live a very healthy life and hence have such less hospitalization rates. The author fails to demonstrate any correlation between the good health of the residents and consumption of Saluda Natural Spring Water. The author also quickly assumes that the the people of Saluda actually have access to this spring water. What if the bottling plant’s operations have caused scarcity of the spring water in Saluda and most if not all residents are drinking the bottled water of another brand? Had the author provided answers to any of these questions, the argument would have been a convincing one.
Secondly, the author readily assumes that drinking Saluda Natural Spring Water is a wise investment in one’s health even though the Saluda water is expensive. This again is a rather weak and unsubstantiated claim as the author never once does a cost benefit analysis of the alleged health benefits of the drink vs the high cost. What if the market is flooded with much more economical spring water brands from the town of Saluda? Then surely buying Saluda Natural Spring Water wont be a wise investment. The author also mentions that the spring water has several minerals beneficial to humans and is also free of bacteria. However, if Saluda Water has all the same minerals as the other water available in the market, then why should consumers see Saluda as an investment? Without doing a comparison of Saluda to its competitors, the author claims that Saluda should be the choice of everyone who cares about their health.
Clearly, there is much that has been left out by the argument and many questions have been left unanswered. The author must procure evidence for the assumptions they use to reach the conclusion. Had the author answered any of the questions such as have the health benefits Saluda Water been checked by the govt food & safety authority or do the residents of Saluda actually drink and recommend the Saluda Water? Had the author even touched upon these aforementioned points, the argument could have been strengthened.
In conclusion, this is a deeply flawed argument because of all the above stated reasons. The holes in this argument are many in number and massive in size. The author leaves out several necessary contributing factors needed to assess the merits and demerits of this argument. The absence of facts and background information needed to evaluate this argument leaves it open to debate.

Sajjad1994

GRE Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Nov 2016

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 16,753

Own Kudos:

51,993

[1]

Given Kudos: 6,342

GPA: 3.62

Products:

Posts: 16,753

Kudos: 51,993

[1]

19 Jul 2023, 12:22

Kudos

Bookmarks

AWA Score: 5 out of 6

Coherence and Connectivity (5.5/6):
The essay demonstrates a generally strong coherence and connectivity of ideas. The writer maintains a clear and logical flow of thoughts throughout the essay, with each paragraph building upon the previous one. The essay starts by summarizing the argument, then proceeds to identify the assumptions and flaws in the reasoning, and finally concludes with a succinct evaluation. Transitions between paragraphs are generally smooth and effective, helping to maintain the overall coherence of the essay. However, there could have been more explicit connections between some ideas, which would have further strengthened the essay's coherence.

Word Structure (6/6):
The word structure in the essay is sound, with well-formed sentences and appropriate use of punctuation. The writer effectively uses a mix of simple and complex sentences to convey their points clearly. The vocabulary used is appropriate and contributes to the overall clarity of the essay. There are no glaring grammatical errors that disrupt the readability of the text.

Paragraph Structure and Formation (5/6):
The essay follows a standard paragraph structure with a clear topic sentence and supporting details in each paragraph. The writer effectively presents separate ideas in distinct paragraphs, allowing the reader to follow the argument easily. However, in some instances, the paragraphs could have been more tightly focused on a single main point. Additionally, a stronger concluding paragraph summarizing the main points and restating the overall evaluation would have improved the paragraph structure.

Language and Grammar (6/6):
The language and grammar in the essay are strong, with precise and articulate expression of ideas. The writer consistently maintains proper sentence structure and uses appropriate verb tenses, pronouns, and subject-verb agreements. There are no major grammatical errors that hinder comprehension, and the essay effectively communicates its points.

Vocabulary and Word Expression (5.5/6):
The essay employs a good range of vocabulary, demonstrating a strong command of language. The writer effectively uses words that fit the context and convey the intended meaning. However, there is room for slightly more variety and sophistication in vocabulary to enhance the overall expression. A few more specific and precise word choices could have been incorporated to further enrich the language.

Overall, the essay provides a thorough evaluation of the given argument, highlighting its weaknesses and assumptions. The analysis is coherent and well-structured, with mostly sound language and grammar. To improve the essay, the writer could focus on making stronger connections between ideas, refining the paragraph structure, and incorporating more diverse vocabulary. Additionally, a concluding paragraph that succinctly restates the main evaluation would provide a more polished finish to the essay.

sv2023

Century_Foods

Joined: 08 Sep 2023

Last visit: 06 Nov 2023

Posts: 3

Kudos: 0

08 Sep 2023, 01:39

Kudos

Bookmarks

Thank you so much. Keep it up.

Anusha09

Joined: 27 Jul 2019

Last visit: 10 Apr 2026

Posts: 3

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 41

Posts: 3

Kudos: 1

30 Sep 2023, 10:44

Kudos

Bookmarks

Here is how I analyzed the Essay. Experts please help grade this essay.

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counter examples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

My Answer:
The argument that Saluda Natural Spring Water is a wise investment in good health omits some important concerns that must be addressed to substantiate the argument. The reasoning given to reach to the conclusion is merely based on results from a study and the hospitalization rate of the residents of Saluda. These alone do not constitute a logical argument since it fails to consider potential flaws in the argument.

Firstly, the argument assumes that less frequent hospitalization implies that the residents do not get sick often. What if the residents fall sick regularly but do not go to the hospital for their treatment and get treated at home? Had the author talked about the frequency of the residents falling sick rather than the frequency of hospitalization, then the argument would be much stronger.

Secondly, the argument fails to establish the credibility and validity of the Laboratory studies. We do not know if the lab tests were not tampered with or if the lab tests were done correctly. Additionally, the studies very vaguely mentions that the Saluda Natural Spring Water contains "several" minerals necessary for good health without specifying the minerals. For such a strong claim, it is always better to mention the source of the study results and the lab that conducted the research.

Finally, the argument assumes that just because Saluda Natural Spring Water is bottled in Saluda, the residents are drinking the same. What if the residents drink tap water or drink water from some other stream? Had the argument clearly stated that the residents drank Saluda Spring Water, the argument would be much stronger.

Because the argument leaves out several key issues it is flawed. If it included more concrete proof of the items discussed above the argument would have been more convincing.

Sajjad1994

GRE Forum Moderator

Joined: 02 Nov 2016

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 16,753

Own Kudos:

51,993

Given Kudos: 6,342

GPA: 3.62

Products:

Posts: 16,753

Kudos: 51,993

01 Oct 2023, 02:15

Kudos

Bookmarks

AWA Score: 5 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity (5/6):
The essay generally maintains coherence and connectivity throughout. It effectively transitions between different points and ideas. However, there are a few instances where sentence structures could be improved for smoother readability.

Word structure (5/6):
The essay demonstrates a good command of language and vocabulary. The sentences are generally well-structured, but there are some minor issues with word choice and sentence structure in a few places.

Paragraph structure and formation (5/6):
The essay follows a standard paragraph structure with clear topic sentences and supporting details. However, some sentences are long and complex, which could be broken into shorter ones for improved clarity.

Language and Grammar (5.5/6):
The language and grammar in the essay are strong, with only minor grammatical errors and awkward phrasings. The essay maintains a formal tone suitable for an analytical essay.

Vocabulary and word expression (5.5/6):
The vocabulary and word expression are effective throughout the essay. The writer uses a variety of vocabulary to convey their points and ideas, though there are a few instances where word choice could be more precise.

Overall, this essay effectively analyzes the argument presented in the prompt. It identifies the flaws in the argument and offers constructive criticism. Some minor improvements in sentence structure and word choice could enhance the overall quality of the essay.

Anusha09

Devanshu01

Joined: 07 Jul 2023

Last visit: 11 Aug 2024

Posts: 3

Given Kudos: 3

Posts: 3

Kudos: 0

06 Oct 2023, 09:58

Kudos

Bookmarks

hi Sajjad1994 / SergeyOrshanskiy , kindly rate the below response:
Through the given argument, the author is trying to convince readers to drink saluda natural spring water instead of tap water as it is good for health although it is expensive. The author supports his argument with the following inferences and claims:
1) Laboartary studies have shown that saluda natural spring water contains many minerals good for health and also it is completely free of bacteria
2) residents of town saluda are hospitalized less frequently than national average
Stated as such argument seems too far fetched. It lacks proper support for the reasoning, supporting data and research to link claims with conclusions. Please find detiled explainations on the argument's flaws and how it can be strengthened:
1) Demographic differences: Author fails to provide data and research comparing the quality of tap water for town in question and quality of saluda spring water. Quality of tap water varies from place to place. Argument may hold true for towns with bad quality tap water but may fail for towns where tap water quality is already good enough. Also variying demographics means varying diets. It might be possible that certain towns are already getting the required minerals from other sources in their diets. Hence an extensive research should be done to compare water's quality against objective parameters and across changing demographics.
2) Link between claim and conclusion: The argument's claim that fewer cases of hospitalizations is directly related to consumption of saluda natural spring water is too far fetched and has many flaws. For the start, author gives no data whether people actually drink bottled water or water from natural spring. If they consume water from natural spring then the aforesaid minerals and lack of bacteria comes at the water processing site or this is something present naturally in water.
Moreover, Author's argument lacks research and data linking lack of hospitalizations to water consumption. There can be a plethora of reasons for relatively good health of town or It could be a rural town with fewer hospitals and hence consequently fewer hospitalizations. Or it might be a town with better air or food which are reasons of better health rather than just water. Hence argument is too far fetched in claiming that water has directly led to good health of people in the town. For above reasons, argument lacks proper reasonsing and statistical support.

Due to the above reasons, argument is neither logical not convincing. It lacks fundamental links and proper statistical support and needs to be supported with more research and data to make it persuasive