For decades, people have believed that saturated fats are bad for heal

Question

For decades, people have believed that saturated fats are bad for health. A recent study suggests that the first study that led to the conclusion that saturated fats increase the risk of heart diseases was deeply flawed. Further, the medical fraternity is divided on whether saturated fats are the reason for the onset of chronic diseases such as diabetes among people. Moreover, scientists have proved that eating saturated fat raises the amount of HDL, the good cholesterol in the blood and changes the small, dense LDL, which is bad, to Large LDL, which is benign. Hence, the perception that saturated fats are bad for health is deeply flawed."

The argument claims that eating saturated fats raises the amount of HDL and changes the dense LDL to large LDL so perception that saturated fats are bad for health is flawed. Stated in this way, argument fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it can be evaluated. The argument is based on various unwarranted assumptions for which there are no clear evidences. Therefore, argument is rather weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.

First, the argument claims that first study that led to the conclusion that saturated fats increases the risk of heart diseases was deeply flawed. But what about other studies? The argument makes the assumption that flaw in first study means other studies are also flawed. However, this is not the case in real life. Most of the times studies conducted after first one are improvement of the first and makes it more detailed and comprehensive. The argument fails to consider the possibility that other studies may have made more comprehensive and flawless conclusions.

Second , the argument assumes that saturated fats are the only reason for onset of chronic disease. However, there may be another reasons for onset. It is possible that onset is because of lack of vital vitamins and nutrients in the body or of any other reason except saturated fats.

Finally, the argument concludes that perception that saturated fats are bad for health is deeply flawed on the basis of increase in the amount of HDL and change in dense LDL. However, it doesn't mention how good cholesterol helps in reducing the possibility of onset of chronic diseases such as diabetes. The argument would have been considerably strengthened if it had mentioned health benefits of increase in amount of HDL and change in dense HDL to Large LDL.

In summary, argument suffers from various flaws and is implausible, The argument would have been more cleaner and effective if it had mentioned all the relevant evidences with respect to various assumptions. Also, analysis of argument raises various questions for which there is no clear answer. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

AWA Score: 4 out of 6

I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.

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  
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: 1.5/5  
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

walterwhite756 · Answer

Hi  Sajjad1994 , Please rate my response to same prompt.

Prompt:

The following appeared in a health magazine:
"For decades, people have believed that saturated fats are bad for health. A recent study suggests that the first study that led to the conclusion that saturated fats increase the risk of heart diseases was deeply flawed. Further, the medical fraternity is divided on whether saturated fats are the reason for the onset of chronic diseases such as diabetes among people. Moreover, scientists have proved that eating saturated fat raises the amount of HDL, the good cholesterol in the blood and changes the small, dense LDL, which is bad, to Large LDL, which is benign. Hence, the perception that saturated fats are bad for health is deeply flawed."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the given argument, the author claims that the perception that saturated fats are bad for health is deeply flawed owing to the findings of a recent study on effects of saturated fats on heart diseases. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it could be evaluated. Among the most pivotal shortcomings of the argument are its inability to address or even acknowledge its underlying assumptions and lack of sufficient information to substantiate its claims. Therefore the argument is rather weak, unconvincing, and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that saturated fats are not bad for health because the first study that proved so, was suggested to be flawed by a recent study. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. For example it may be the case that saturated fats may be detrimental to health by some other, yet unknown mechanism. Clearly, saturated fats may not necessarily lead to heart diseases but may lead to some other diseases which may not be beneficial for a person. Further, it may be possible that the recent study that suggests the first study is flawed, is flawed itself. The argument could have been more persuasive if it explicitly stated that consumption of saturated fats does not increase the risk of any kind of diseases.

Second, the argument claims that eating saturated fats is beneficial for health by citing findings of certain set of scientists. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as author does not demonstrate any correlation between HDL, LDL levels and their impact on health of people. To illustrate, author should have included lower and upper limits of LDL and HDL which may be tolerated by body. While HDL may be increased by consumption of saturated fats, a higher amount of HDL in human blood may increase risk of other serious diseases. Indeed, if the amount of good cholestrol is increased in the blood, it may not always lead to desired health benefits. If the author had mentioned these details about ideal range of HDL and LDL levels and implications of increased levels of HDL and LDL in human blood, the argument would have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, the argument concludes that the perception that saturated fats are bad for health is deeply flawed. In order to assess merits and demerits of a certain situation, it is essential to have a full working knowledge of all contributing factors. Are there any other studies that have demonstrated that saturated fats are bad for health in the past? Are these studies valid even after the first study has been suggested to be flawed by recent study? Are there any other diseases which may be triggered by increased consumption of saturated fats? Without answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence. As a result, the conclusion that saturated fats are not bad for health has no legs to stand on.

The aforementioned argument contains a considerable number of defects, most blatant of which have been discussed above. Had the author managed to address these aforementioned concerns, both the persuasive ability and apparent legitimacy of the argument would have been greatly reinforced. However, as it stands, one must necessarily conclude that the argument is a hasty generalization, filled with overreaching assumptions, poor reasoning and deficiencies in information. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

AWA Score: 4.5 - 5 out of 6

Coherence and connectivity: 4.5/6
The essay generally maintains good coherence and connectivity between sentences and paragraphs. It follows a logical structure and transitions well between ideas. However, some sentences could be more tightly connected for smoother flow.

Word structure: 5/6
The word structure is solid, with a variety of vocabulary used appropriately. There are no major issues with word choice, but a few sentences could benefit from more concise phrasing.

Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/6
Paragraphs are generally well-structured, with clear topic sentences and supporting details. However, there are some instances where paragraphs could be more tightly focused on a single main point.

Language and Grammar: 5/6
The language and grammar are strong, with only minor issues such as missing articles or prepositions. The essay effectively conveys the intended meaning with few grammatical errors.

Vocabulary and word expression: 4.5/6
The vocabulary used is varied and appropriate for the topic. However, there are a few instances where word choice could be more precise or where sentences could be more concise for greater impact.

Overall, this essay presents a well-structured and logically coherent response to the argument prompt. It effectively analyzes the argument's reasoning and use of evidence while highlighting its flaws. The minor improvements needed mainly concern tightening up sentence structure and word choice for greater clarity and impact.

For decades, people have believed that saturated fats are bad for heal

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards