+0
Teacher gave me another chance.. I forgot to write a paragraph about science, non-science and pseudoscience about my topic which is raw food vs cooked food. I need to write how my topic difference from others. I think my topic is related to science because I wrote about the benefits... how healthy raw food are.. and what happens to it when cooked .. etc.

I really need help because if I do it correctly.. I will get 90!! instead of 65.
1 2
Comments  (Page 2) 
OK, I am done writing. My topic was Raw food versus Cooked food. I forgot to write a paragraph about me explaning how my topic relates to science,pseudoscience, and non-science and I differentiated between them. I got a 0 out of 25.. hoping to get a 25 out of 25. So I hope someone can help me correct. I don't know if I included non science.. I did wrote a bit, but not sure if correct.

/* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}



Authentic scientific studies show that raw food cures diseases and protects against cancer. Another study shows that you will feel more energetic, lose weight, feel younger, and have clear skin by eating raw food, because it has all the nutrients that our body needs. Some pseudoscientific reports, however, have suggested that we won't live longer by eating cooked foods. Another false reports show that fiber is lost while cooking. In fact, studies have shown that boiling increases fiber, lower cholesterol, and regulate blood sugars and diabetic. Some doctors are convincing their patients to go at least 60-80 percent raw or to eat healthy. Also, they may tell a patient to stop eating a specific food because it’s bad for them. People who learn about these may be non-science, so they start helping out people that eating healthy prevents diseases, makes them younger, have clear skin, etc. So they are speculative thought, rather than with facts, until they search on the internet for facts.
Authentic scientific studies show that raw food cures diseases and protects against cancer. Another study shows that you will feel more energetic, lose weight, feel younger, and have clear skin by eating raw food, because it has all the nutrients that our body needs. Some pseudoscientific reports, however, have suggested that we won't live longer by eating cooked foods. Another false report shows that fiber is lost while cooking. In fact, studies have shown that boiling increases fiber, lowers cholesterol, and regulates blood sugars. Some doctors are convincing their patients to eat at least 60-80 percent raw foods to eat healthily. Also, they may tell a patient to stop eating a specific food because it's bad for them. People who learn about these may not be scientific, but they start explaining to people that eating healthy prevents diseases, makes them younger, have clear skin, etc. So theirs is speculative thought, rather than factual, until they search on the internet for facts.

However, I am still not sure what your teacher is looking for. 0 out of 25 is pretty bad.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Thanks for correcting my grammar. I got a 0 out of 25 because I forgot to include a paragraph of how my topic relates to science, pseudoscience, and non-science and I need to differentiate between them. I know, you probably don't get it because this is biology. Emotion: sad
I hope someone who knows about biology, etc. can help me if this is what she's looking for.
Can you correct my grammar one more time, please? I am sorry for the incovenient. I need to start reading again! I realized that my grammar is getting worse. Emotion: stick out tongue.. here it is:



Scientists are able to use methods to be able to test a specific food and then find the cause-and-effect, whereas pseudoscience is not able to do that. They are usually false. For instance, they reported that all fiber is lost when raw food is cooked, but they have no proof about the case. Also, they reported that we won’t live long if we eat cooked foods which are a myth. Science does a controlled study with a group and a control group differing by just one variable, is the hallmark for a scientific study, although not all studies can be done like that. They could take years to study a specific food to find facts. It is true that raw foods, such as vegetables/fruits, nuts/seeds, and sprouts are better for you than cooked food, such as they protect us against cancer and heart diseases. Also, scientist believes that we will have more energy, and lose weights by eating raw foods. Some fake science reported that enzyme is destroyed when cooked above 106 degrees F. In reality, most enzymes are denatured and deactivated when food is cooked, not destroyed. Non-science would be nutritional beliefs that do not rely on scientific words such as enzymes, vitamins, and exact temperatures in degrees, etc. An example might be that someone drank a green smoothie consisting of leafy greens, frozen fruits (bananas, berries, etc) and water. And then he said that he has more energy, lost weights, and got clear and smooth skin, so his doctor recommended him to keep drinking the green smoothies because he seemed very healthy.



I have underlined some problems and struck out useless verbiage:

Scientists are able to use methods to be able to test a specific food and then find the cause-and-effect [of what?!], whereas pseudoscience is not able to do that. They are usually false. For instance, they [who?!]reported that all fiber is lost when raw food is cooked, but they have no proof about the case. Also, they reported that we won't live long if we eat cooked foods which are a myth. Science does a controlled study with a group and a control group differing by just one variable, is the hallmark for a scientific study, although not all studies can be done like that. They could take years to study a specific food to find facts. It is true that raw foods, such as vegetables/fruits, nuts/seeds, and sprouts are better for you than cooked food, such as they protect us against cancer and heart diseases. Also, scientist believes that we will have more energy, and lose weights by eating raw foods. Some fake science reported that enzyme is destroyed when cooked above 106 degrees F. In reality, most enzymes are denatured and deactivated when food is cooked, not destroyed. Non-science would be nutritional beliefs that do not rely on scientific words such as enzymes, vitamins, and exact temperatures in degrees, etc. An example might be that someone drank a green smoothie consisting of leafy greens, frozen fruits (bananas, berries, etc) and water. And then he said that he has more energy, lost weights, and got clear and smooth skin, so his doctor recommended him to keep drinking the green smoothies because he seemed very healthy.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?