0
Huynguyen158 Posted 10 years ago
Essay & Composition Writing
Please help me correct this writing
Hi teachers,
This is my IELTS writing. Could you please help me check and give me some advice to improve it?
Nowadays animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to test the safety of other products. Some people argue that these experiments should be banned because it is morally wrong to cause animals to suffer while others are in favour of them because of their benefits to humanity.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking advantage of animals to examine the effect of new medicines or other products has opened an intense debate over the past few decades. While there are numerous arguments for and against this action, as far as I am concerned, a compromise would be an entirely reasonable and justifiable solution.
On the one hand, animal experimentation has helped scientists create safety products for people and contributed to the development of science. In fact, although every new pharmaceutical has been well researched before putting on for people, there always exist latent hazards which cannot be aware of at all. This could lead to serious effects if such medicines were provided to patients without any checks on living body. Therefore, testing medicines on animal would minimize and anticipate the dangers that could happen before applying it for people. Additionally, the study of science demands sacrifices as well as the purpose of science is to serve human beings after all. Then, if animal testing is totally necessary, people should still do so.
On the other hand, animal testing has several upsides and ethical aspects that people need to take in to account. Firstly, animals are living creatures which have their own emotions and feel the same pain, hurt, and joy as people. Thus, it is considered morally wrong to use them in this way solely for human benefit. Secondly, animals are not completely identical to people in terms of structural biology. The reaction of drug in an animal’s body would be quite different from that in people. Therefore, success in animal experiments does not equate to human safety, not to mention that many of these tests have no real-life purposes and may never be used for anything useful. Consequently, the use of animal for scientific research is believed to be not only a cruel practice, but merely a waste of time and money.
In conclusion, animal experiments should be conducted in a humane way following by a set of strict rules. The line between science and morality sometimes is hard to define, which means emotion may be the ultimate determining factor in this conflict.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you very much for your help!
This is my IELTS writing. Could you please help me check and give me some advice to improve it?
Nowadays animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to test the safety of other products. Some people argue that these experiments should be banned because it is morally wrong to cause animals to suffer while others are in favour of them because of their benefits to humanity.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking advantage of animals to examine the effect of new medicines or other products has opened an intense debate over the past few decades. While there are numerous arguments for and against this action, as far as I am concerned, a compromise would be an entirely reasonable and justifiable solution.
On the one hand, animal experimentation has helped scientists create safety products for people and contributed to the development of science. In fact, although every new pharmaceutical has been well researched before putting on for people, there always exist latent hazards which cannot be aware of at all. This could lead to serious effects if such medicines were provided to patients without any checks on living body. Therefore, testing medicines on animal would minimize and anticipate the dangers that could happen before applying it for people. Additionally, the study of science demands sacrifices as well as the purpose of science is to serve human beings after all. Then, if animal testing is totally necessary, people should still do so.
On the other hand, animal testing has several upsides and ethical aspects that people need to take in to account. Firstly, animals are living creatures which have their own emotions and feel the same pain, hurt, and joy as people. Thus, it is considered morally wrong to use them in this way solely for human benefit. Secondly, animals are not completely identical to people in terms of structural biology. The reaction of drug in an animal’s body would be quite different from that in people. Therefore, success in animal experiments does not equate to human safety, not to mention that many of these tests have no real-life purposes and may never be used for anything useful. Consequently, the use of animal for scientific research is believed to be not only a cruel practice, but merely a waste of time and money.
In conclusion, animal experiments should be conducted in a humane way following by a set of strict rules. The line between science and morality sometimes is hard to define, which means emotion may be the ultimate determining factor in this conflict.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you very much for your help!
Top answer
Taking advantage of animals to examine the effect of test new medicines or other products has opened an intense debate over the past few decades. While there are numerous arguments for and against this practice, action, as far as I am concerned, a compromise would be an entirely reasonable and justifiable solution. On the one hand, animal experimentation has helped scientists create sa fe ty products for people and contributed to the development of science.
- Taking advantage of animals to examine the effect of test new medicines or other products has opened an intense debate over the past few decades.
- While there are numerous arguments for and against this practice, action, as far as I am concerned, a compromise would be an entirely reasonable and justifiable solution.
- On the one hand, animal experimentation has helped scientists create sa fe ty products for people and contributed to the development of science.
- In fact, although every new pharmaceutica ls has been are typically well researched before they go on sale, putting on for people, there always often exist latent hazards which cannot be always discovered in time.
- aware of at all.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
3 Answers
0
Taking advantage of animals to examine the effect of test new medicines or other products has opened an intense debate over the past few decades. While there are numerous arguments for and against this practice, action, as far as I am concerned, a compromise would be an entirely reasonable and justifiable solution.
On the one hand, animal experimentatio
On the one hand, animal experimentatio
00
Thanks for your kind help, teechr. I still have some questions, please help me:
put on = to produce or provide something, especially for the
teechralthough new pharmaceuticals are typically well researched before they go on saleI'm a bit confused about the use of "put on", according to Cambridge Dictionary:putting on for people
put on = to produce or provide something, especially for the
00
huynguyen158Is "put on for people" wrongly used or just unnatural?It's typically used to refer to events or services, not so much with products.
huynguyen158Does"in time" here mean "eventually"?No, I used it to mean "before it's too late."
Have a look at meaning #1 below.
0
Related Questions