[IELTS] Writing Task 2 On the justification of animal testing

the animal experiments problem

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 view and give your opinion.

One of the most heated debates of the last few decades has been the extent to which humans should allow animal experiments or avoid it due to ethical reason. It is usually argued that testing on animals is an inhumane crime, while the others believe that this kind of experiment can contribute to the development of humankind. This essay agrees that animal testing should be eliminated because it causes more damages than being useful for humane society.

Those who support animal test claim that because scientists cannot perfom experiment on a human being, using non-human animals in laboratories are the only method that can give the most accurate result to develop medical treatments or check the safety of other products such as cosmetics or detergent. According to USA National Academy of Science, the interactions between a living organism and the environment or the chemicals are so complicated that it cannot be simulated by even the most sophisticated computer model on earth. Furthermore, since most of the animals which are used in the laboratories such as rats, mices, fishes or sheeps lack intelligence, many people believe that their lives are worth less than the life of a human and thus it is permissible to harm them to ensure the future of mankind, especially in the case of finding a cure to treat deadly diseases such as Ebola or HIV.

Meanwhile, opponents of animal experimentation - sometimes called animal rights activists - argue that since animals used in experiments are usually exposed to cruel procedures which cause extreme pain and suffering such as force feeding, forced injection or food and water deprivation, this kind of experimental research is considered to be immoral. Newest research has proved that animals have the same capacity as humans to feel pain and experience distress when being harmed and killed, therefore people do not have right to cause suffering and death to other species. Moreover, animal tests are really expensive and do not give reliable results in some occasions. For example, some medical reports in 1950s showed that sleeping pills had caused serious side-effect on pregnant women and their babies, despite having tested on animals prior to its commercial release and costed the government more than $10 billion. It must be said that recent technological breakthroughs have introduced many alternative testing method that can replace animals in laboratories such as artificial human skin or virtual cells which are cheaper and potentially more efficient than animal experimentation. For this reason, I believe that humankind should stop this animal cruelty and figure out better method to test products or find life-saving treatments.

In conclusion, while there are convincing arguments on both sides of the debate, it cannot be denied that even though animal experiments still give some benefits to humane society, its unethical approach and unstable prediction of effect on humans outweigh its plausible advantages. Therefore,

animal testing should be replaced by better practices in the future.

@bereadyforE
Welcome to the forum. Here's my feedback on your writing.

Firstly, when you're introducing the thesis statement such as the first sentence you have, try to be more concise with language usage. This is imperative because this will determine how well you will be received by the readers. If you're able to find a shorter alternative to the sentences you are writing, this will help you become more desirable and understandable for the readers. For instance, in the second sentence of your first paragraph, you could have just mentioned that testing on animals is either perceived as unethical or justifiable depending on one's perception. Having a shorter and less complex structure also will allow the readers to have a better discernment of what goes through in the write-up.

Clarity is crucial when you are writing. In the second paragraph, for instance, the word environment and chemicals can't be treated as alternatives to each other in the context. This is most especially since they don't really have the same meaning. Hence, using them in your first sentence here doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Try to stick with one concept and expand from there. This will be much better than trying to squeeze in too many details that aren't really even that sensible.

@Maria
Thank you so much for your feedback. It's so helpful to me. I always struggle to arrange my ideas so thanks to your feedback, I will try my best to improve my writing. I'm so sorry to bother you but would you mind if I asked you a question? Because I'm trying to get an IELTS Band 8.0, if I can fix the aforementioned problem, will this essay reach the requirement of band 8?

Thank you so much for your insight.