IELTS Writing Task 2 – Some people think that using animals for experimentation purpose is cruel
Some people think that using animals for experimentation purpose is cruel, but other people think that is necessary for the development of science.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
You should write at least 250 words.
IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Essay Sample
Sample Answer 1:
Animal experimentation has been a debated issue for many decades. Some people believe
that scientists’ locking up animals in a laboratory environment is not what nature intended –
and they are probably right. Others believe laboratory animals perform a great service for
humankind.
For many years now, scientists have been working hard to develop cures for diseases.
From time to time, new medicines and drugs are created which may be a solution to a
serious illness affecting mankind. In order to determine if there is any level of danger in
these drugs, these are first tested on animals. For example, who has not heard of the
Thalidomide case? In 1952, a drug was used for vomiting of pregnancy. Obviously, it was not
tested properly. All the children born had seal-like limbs. By the time it was known that
thalidomide was responsible, it was too late and much harm had been done.
Another reason for justification of animal experimentation is that the life span of guinea pigs
used for experimentation is very small, only 3-4 years and so the effect of drugs can be
tested over generations. Even if humans volunteered for testing, it would not help to test
whether the effect passed from one generation to the other.
The arguments against animal experimentation are that animals are also sentient beings
and we have no right to exploit them for our selfish motives. Secondly, they are very
different from humans and so what is tested on animals cannot be applied to humans.
Finally, unnecessary experiments are done just for new cosmetics which are not even
needed, which is bad.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that animals are not humans. Although the life of
animals in a lab is regrettable, I much prefer a guinea pig to die than a human being. The
human need must always come first. It is sad that any living thing must suffer but the use of
laboratory animals in testing new products made today goes a long way toward helping
humankind enjoy a better tomorrow.
Model Answer 2:
It is true that using animal as subject for scientists experiment is not ethical. While some people agree with that opinion, but I believe that this experiment can be used as improvement of science technology development.
In the growth of science technology, many scientists use animal as subject for their experiment such us mice, monkeys, fish, and pigs. People who do not know what the purpose of this experiment will say that scientists do not care about animal welfare. The scientists use that animals and make them genetically engineered. For example, scientists put camera and machine to goliath beetle so they can control the beetle movement whether it has to turn right, turn left, go up, or land in a desk. People argue this experiment has changed the natural structure of this creature’s body to the structure that scientists want. Another experiment is scientists put bio-luminescence to fish, monkeys, and pigs so they can spark a light in the dark. Many people assume that it is not logical, and there are no benefits from this experiment. The scientists are doing research without expecting the implication that will occur.
On the other hand, there are many experiments that scientists and researchers have done and the benefits have been seen and solve human problem in this world. For example, drugs that we use for daily life is the result from try-and-error experiment from scientists. Another example is cloning technology that scientists did to horse and pigs for the purpose of preserving endangered animals.
In conclusion, although scientists and researchers have many experiments in animal and these seem cruel, I believe that it is for the good of science growth and there are many benefits that we get from these experiments. We have to thank them because they found the answer from our problem related in health, science, and knowledge.
Model Answer 3:
There is a general discussion these days over animal experimentation. A large number of people tend to live under the illusion that it is inhumane to carry out animal testing, while others accept that is a part of scientific research.
Admittedly, few would disagree that laboratory animals serve to boost the safety of new vaccines and drugs act on humans. Advances in the animal experimentation have enhanced our physical well-being, comfort, and life span. Moreover, cosmetics testing on animals are crucial to cosmetics companies in promoting their products. Without the assurance of security and reliability, customers will never accept these products. Plus these enterprises produce and sell substandard products shall be investigated for legal responsibility according to law or even facing the situation of bankruptcy.
Aside from the foregoing two provisos, however, I fundamentally disagree with the claim above. From the view of morality, animal testing is morally wrong and inhumane behavior. Animals, especially those lovely pets give the greatest pleasure to the greatest number of people in the world today. Years of keeping pets have shortened their owners’ loneliness and relieved their owners’ stress. Dolphin, a kind of large mammal, has been proved that can treat chronic fatigue syndrom, headaches, depression and autism. Accordingly, humans ought to build harmonious relationships with animals and protect them. From the view of animal rights, by no means should animals be considered as the experimental subjects, sharing the earth and survival are all animals’ basic rights. Mankind is on no account unnecessary to respect their rights. From the view of national laws, animal testing, broadly defined as legitimate behavior, has a possibility of abusing rights. Some organizations or individuals may indiscriminately killing or slaughter animals in the name of the law. Take Japanese as an example, people in Japan have hunted thousands and hundreds of whales along with legal protection.
To sum up, though animal experimentation has produced benefits to us, through reliable alternatives and computer simulation programs can also reach these effects. I assert that animal testing should be limited and humans should not narrowly separate humans from animals, animals can be a friend, and a teacher.
Model Answer 4:
In some countries, a number of scientists use animals for the purpose of experimentation, in which some people content that it is essential for people, because the experiment is helpful for people to develop science. However, others say that it is too brutal, for the animals such as mice, dogs, and apes are living organisms like a human. In this essay I will discuss both negative and positive views regarding using animals.
On the one hand, the purpose of experiment plays a major role in people’s life, because some medicine is made by the experimentation. For example, an AIDS drug has been developing by this method, and also many vaccines such as influenza, and measles rely on animal tests. Additionally, if we use only humans, it leads to grave impacts on society like the Second World War. Therefore, it is considered as important for people to make medicine.
On the other hand, the animals such as mice, dogs, and apes are living things with feeling. For instance, it is reported that an uncountable amount of animals are killed by humans for test, where they are to feel dreadful and suffering why they are not a human. Thus, those who oppose to using animals for experimentation tend to say it is cruel.
Despite the fact that the using animals leads to advantages because it gives people opportunities to develop science. Still, in my opinion, the experimentation should not be in the world, because, the animal could feel like us when they are killed by someone.
Model Answer 5:
Concerning the issue whether scientists should use living animals for scientific research, people hold different views. Some people claim that it is cruel, while some other people argue that it is beneficial to the development of science. As far as I am concerned, I am in favor of carrying out experiments on animals.
Firstly, scientists can do initial experiments on animals to test the effect of new medicine. Scientists have founded so many milestones on the way to medical development. But they can not find effective treatment to some diseases like cancer and AIDS, which are fatal to peoples health. Through experiments on animals, scientists can not only understand the pathology of some diseases, but also try the effect of medicine and find the most effective treatment to these diseases, making great breakthroughs in the field of medicine.
Secondly, using living animals in the laboratory, the teachers in the university or some research institutes can demonstrate the anatomic knowledge to the students majoring in medicine, rendering students a direct understanding of biological knowledge, which can improve the level of medical research and make great contributions to the medical science. Without experiments on living animals, genetic technology would not have developed so quickly. Actually, most scientists attribute their success and breakthroughs to experiments on animals.
Finally, Some animals can provide human beings with essential organs for transplantation. Genetic technology will change the genes of some animals. In the near future, organs of animals will take the place of artificial organs like heart pumps, prolonging patients life.
However, researches on living animals face a moral problem because animals are also creatures in the nature, which possess equal rights as human beings. On second thoughts, it is worthwhile for the purpose to accelerate the development of science and the progress of human civilization.
Sample Answer 6:
It is true that medicines and other products are routinely tested on animals before they are cleared for human use. While I tend towards the viewpoint that animal testing is morally wrong, I would have to support a limited amount of animal experimentation for the development of medicines.
On the one hand, there are clear ethical arguments against animal experimentation. To use a common example of this practice, laboratory mice may be given an illness so that the effectiveness of a new drug can be measured. Opponents of such research argue that humans have no right to subject animals to this kind of trauma, and that the lives of all creatures should be respected. They believe that the benefits to humans do not justify the suffering caused, and that scientists should use alternative methods of research.
On the other hand, reliable alternatives to animal experimentation may not always be available. Supporters of the use of animals in medical research believe that a certain amount of suffering on the part of mice or rats can be justified if human lives are saved. They argue that opponents of such research might feel differently if a member of their own families needed a medical treatment that had been developed through the use of animal experimentation. Personally, I agree with the banning of animal testing for non-medical products, but I feel that it may be a necessary evil where new drugs and medical procedures are concerned.
In conclusion, it seems to me that it would be wrong to ban testing on animals for vital medical research until equally effective alternatives have been developed.
Submit your Essay here in the comment section, we will add your essay in our post.
(Collected; Source: Internet)
