IELTS Writing Task 2: Animal testing is morally wrong but it can save human's life.

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 favor of them because of their benefits to humanity.

Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

It is true that animal experiments are routinely used to develop new drugs and to test the safety of other products. Opinions are divided on whether we should ban this method because it is ethically wrong or we should continue using it as it brings benefits to humans . From my aspect, I agree with the latter only if the use of animal testing is controlled.

On the one hand, there are ethical arguments against animal experimentation. To use a simple example, as laboratory mice may be given an illness so that we can measure the effectiveness of a new drug, they have to suffer physical pain and deprivation of water and food. Opponents of such research argue that humans have no right to subject animals to this kind of trauma and the lives of all creatures should be respected. Moreover, to implement animal testing, a large amount of money have to be expended on the facilities and human resources. As a result, the country's national finance is used to invest in these experiments and can not be used for other purposes, such as housing and education.

On the other hand, it is undeniable that people are still rely on animal testing and until now, there has not been any reliable alternatives to this experiment. Those who argue that implementing animal experimentation is wrong may feel differently if a member of their own families needed medical treatment that is tested through the use of animals. In other words, the suffering of animals can be justified in the lives of humans in some cases. Personally, I agree with the banning of animal testing for non-medical products, but I think it is necessary evil for taking this test for new drugs and medical procedures.

To sum up, people disagree with the use of animals on testing drugs for the reason that it is unjustified to the animals and costly. However, it is necessary to use this method for testing new necessary drugs and medical treatments, which can save many human's lives.

The main problem with this essay is how the writer misinterpreted the writing instructions provided in the writing guide sentence. It clearly says "Discuss both points of view and give your opinion". What are the points of view? The 2 public opinions represented by the words


and


. These are words used alongside the public opinion and reason for each. The job of the writer at this point is to provide his analysis (opinion) of the strenght and validity of each opinion.

Does he support it? Why? If he does not support it, why not? How does his opinion clash or support the public point of view? How valid is his opinion when compared with the public perception? These are the questions that each reasoning paragraph should provide. This is why pronoun differentiation is important in these sorts of discussion. The examiner needs to be clear that comparative discussions on differing and similar opinions are taking place in the paragraphs. Public v. Personal opinion explanations are needed.

As of now, the general opinion provided responds only to the personal opinion aspect rather than the comparative considerations. There are no right or wrong opinions here, only the way the writer views the explanation for each point of view. In a sense, it is a general discussion of differening opinions with personal viewpoints provided for each. This is one time that a single opinion presentation is not warranted.

The reasoning is uneven for the most part and that is why the reasoning will be seen as only being a representative of the writer's opinion. The comparison in the 2nd paragraph is not well presented and is what provides the lack of balance in the discussion presentation. The response format is not properly representative of the discussion requirements.

Lemme help you correct some mistakes:
1st paragraph: to test => delete "to"
2nd paragraph: a large amount of money have to be expended.... => has (the verb contradicts the subject. be careful)