Some people think it's wrong to test new medicines on animals. Do you think the advantages of testing new medicine on animals outweigh the disadvantages?

From ancient times until now, there have been many new tests invented by researchers and most people often use research drugs on animals for testing. It also raises a question mark if using too many animals will have many disadvantages and consequences.

Overview , if experimenters use too much of a new drug on animals, it will cause a lot of harm. The disadvantages and benefits will be equal, but overuse will cause more harm to animals

Using new drugs on animals is not really bad because it is an experiment for greater things, but using too much will lead to bad actors such as animals leading to extinction, rats are the most commonly used species. For example, researchers continually use mice to find the effectiveness of new drugs but forget that animals only have a limited number of animals. If they continue to abuse these animals, mice will gradually become extinct. However , that doesn't mean anyone is at a complete disadvantage, as in previous years, in order to create new drugs for humans to live, researchers had to think day and night to mix and invent them, then use them. animal to see how the animal behaves if used on it. For example, in the year the covid epidemic broke out, many researchers came up with drugs that had to go through many strict tests before being released for injection to humans.

In my opinion, testing new drugs on animals has more benefits than disadvantages because on this earth we care more about human life than animals, which is undeniable. The use of drugs on animals has a higher purpose to develop things in a more positive direction.

In short, the use of drugs on animals is to have a better life, everything has a goal and the researchers who do so are not to blame.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"From ancient times until now" -> "From antiquity to the present"
Explanation: "From antiquity to the present" provides a more formal and precise temporal reference, enhancing the academic tone of the sentence.
"many new tests invented" -> "numerous new tests have been developed"
Explanation: The phrase "numerous new tests have been developed" is more precise and formal, indicating an ongoing process of invention in research.
"most people often use" -> "it is common practice to utilize"
Explanation: "It is common practice to utilize" shifts the focus from "most people" to the action itself, making the statement more objective and suitable for academic writing.
"raises a question mark" -> "raises questions"
Explanation: "Raises questions" is a more academically appropriate phrase than "raises a question mark," which is informal and somewhat colloquial.
"too much of a new drug" -> "excessive amounts of a new drug"
Explanation: "Excessive amounts of a new drug" is more precise and formal, fitting the context of scientific research better.
"not really bad" -> "not inherently detrimental"
Explanation: "Not inherently detrimental" is a more formal and precise way to express that something may not be harmful under certain conditions.
"bad actors such as" -> "negative outcomes such as"
Explanation: "Negative outcomes such as" is more specific and academically appropriate than "bad actors," which is vague and informal.
"animals leading to extinction" -> "the potential extinction of species"
Explanation: "The potential extinction of species" is a more formal and precise way to discuss the consequences of overusing animals in research.
"only have a limited number of animals" -> "are limited in population"
Explanation: "Are limited in population" is a clearer and more formal way to express the idea that there is a finite number of animals available for research.
"abuse these animals" -> "overexploit these animals"
Explanation: "Overexploit" is a more precise and academically suitable term than "abuse" in the context of using animals for research purposes.
"doesn’t mean anyone is at a complete disadvantage" -> "does not imply a total absence of benefits"
Explanation: "Does not imply a total absence of benefits" is a more formal and clear way to express that there are still some advantages, despite the negative aspects.
"think day and night to mix and invent them" -> "diligently work to develop and synthesize them"
Explanation: "Diligently work to develop and synthesize them" is a more formal and precise description of the researchers’ efforts in drug development.
"animal to see how the animal behaves" -> "animals to observe their reactions"
Explanation: "Animals to observe their reactions" is more concise and academically appropriate, avoiding repetition and focusing on the purpose of the research.
"in the year the covid epidemic broke out" -> "during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic"
Explanation: "During the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic" provides a more specific and formal temporal reference.
"came up with drugs" -> "developed pharmaceuticals"
Explanation: "Developed pharmaceuticals" is more precise and formal, suitable for academic writing on the topic of drug development.
"has more benefits than disadvantages" -> "offers more advantages than drawbacks"
Explanation: "Offers more advantages than drawbacks" is a more formal and balanced way to compare the positive and negative aspects.
"on this earth we care more about human life than animals" -> "it is a widely held view that human life is prioritized over that of animals"
Explanation: "It is a widely held view that human life is prioritized over that of animals" presents the idea in a more objective and formal manner, suitable for academic discourse.
"everything has a goal" -> "all actions are goal-oriented"
Explanation: "All actions are goal-oriented" is a more precise and formal way to express the idea that every action is taken with a specific purpose in mind.
"are not to blame" -> "should not be faulted"
Explanation: "Should not be faulted" is a more formal expression, suitable for academic writing, to indicate that researchers should not be blamed for using animals in drug development.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Task Response: 5

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay partially addresses all parts of the question. It discusses both the advantages and disadvantages of testing new medicines on animals, albeit with somewhat limited depth and clarity. The introduction acknowledges the ethical dilemma but lacks specificity in addressing the question’s nuances. The conclusion attempts to reiterate the stance but could be more explicit in summarizing the discussion.
- How to improve: To enhance task response, ensure a more comprehensive exploration of both advantages and disadvantages. Clearly define each aspect of the question in the introduction, providing a roadmap for the subsequent discussion. In the conclusion, restate the position while summarizing key points made throughout the essay.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a somewhat clear position throughout, arguing that the benefits of testing new drugs on animals outweigh the disadvantages. However, this stance could be more explicitly stated and consistently reinforced throughout the essay. There are moments where the argument becomes ambiguous, especially when discussing the potential harms to animals.
- How to improve: Strengthen the clarity and consistency of the position by explicitly stating the thesis in the introduction and reiterating it throughout the body paragraphs. Ensure that each paragraph reinforces the chosen stance, providing evidence and reasoning to support it.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas but lacks sufficient elaboration and support. While it touches upon various points, the analysis remains superficial, with minimal development of arguments. Examples provided are limited in their relevance and fail to fully illustrate the points being made.
- How to improve: Extend and support ideas by providing more detailed explanations, examples, and evidence. Engage in deeper analysis of the implications of testing drugs on animals, considering ethical, scientific, and practical dimensions. Use specific examples and case studies to strengthen the argument and provide a more robust foundation for the claims made.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally stays on topic but occasionally veers off course, especially in the discussion of potential harms to animals leading to extinction. While relevant to the broader ethical considerations, this tangent detracts from the central focus of weighing the advantages and disadvantages of testing drugs on animals.
- How to improve: Maintain a tighter focus on the central theme of the prompt throughout the essay. Avoid tangents that detract from the main argument and ensure that each point directly contributes to the discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of animal testing for new medicines. Use topic sentences and clear transitions to guide the reader through the essay’s logical progression.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a basic level of logical organization. It begins with an introduction stating the topic but lacks a clear thesis statement. The body paragraphs discuss the advantages and disadvantages of testing new medicines on animals, albeit with some repetition and unclear transitions. The conclusion attempts to summarize the author’s stance but is somewhat abrupt.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, ensure a clear and concise thesis statement is presented in the introduction to guide the reader. Use topic sentences at the beginning of each body paragraph to establish clear points. Additionally, focus on smoother transitions between ideas to create a more cohesive flow throughout the essay.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to use paragraphs to separate distinct ideas, but they are unevenly developed and lack coherence. Each paragraph should contain a clear topic sentence followed by supporting details and examples. Some paragraphs in the essay merge multiple ideas, leading to confusion.
- How to improve: Improve paragraph structure by ensuring each paragraph focuses on a single main idea. Start each paragraph with a clear topic sentence that previews the content of the paragraph. Develop each idea fully with relevant examples and explanations to enhance coherence and readability.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs a limited range of cohesive devices, such as transition words (e.g., "however," "in my opinion"). However, their usage is inconsistent, and there is a lack of variety, leading to repetitive structures.
- How to improve: Expand the repertoire of cohesive devices to include a variety of conjunctions, transitional phrases, and pronouns to create smoother connections between sentences and paragraphs. Use cohesive devices strategically to reinforce logical relationships between ideas and avoid repetitive language patterns. Additionally, ensure consistency in their usage throughout the essay for better cohesion.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a moderate range of vocabulary, with some attempt to vary word choice. For instance, synonyms like "experimenters" and "researchers" are used interchangeably to avoid repetition. However, the essay lacks depth in lexical diversity. There is a reliance on basic vocabulary, with limited use of more advanced or precise terms. For example, "new drugs" is frequently repeated without much elaboration or exploration of synonyms or related terms.
- How to improve: To enhance lexical resource, the writer should incorporate a wider variety of vocabulary, particularly by utilizing synonyms, antonyms, and related terms to express ideas more precisely. Instead of repeatedly using phrases like "new drugs," consider employing terms like "pharmaceutical compounds," "experimental medications," or "novel therapeutic agents" where appropriate. Additionally, integrating specialized terminology relevant to the topic can elevate the lexical sophistication of the essay.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay occasionally employs vocabulary with precision, such as distinguishing between "experimenters" and "animals" in the context of drug testing. However, there are instances where vocabulary usage lacks precision or clarity. For example, the phrase "using too much will lead to bad actors such as animals leading to extinction" is ambiguous and could benefit from clearer language to convey the intended meaning.
- How to improve: To enhance precision in vocabulary usage, strive for clarity and specificity in expression. Instead of ambiguous phrases, opt for precise language that leaves no room for misinterpretation. Consider revising sentences for clarity and coherence, ensuring that each word contributes effectively to the intended message. Additionally, carefully select vocabulary that accurately reflects the intended nuances of meaning.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates generally correct spelling, with minimal errors throughout. However, there are instances of misspellings, such as "disadvantages" spelled as "disadventages" and "experimenters" spelled as "experiments."
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, thorough proofreading and spell-checking are essential. Utilize spelling and grammar tools available in word processing software to identify and correct errors. Additionally, consider reviewing common spelling patterns and practicing spelling exercises to reinforce accuracy.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 5

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 5

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a fair variety of sentence structures, albeit with some repetitive patterns. Simple, compound, and complex sentences are used throughout the essay. However, there is room for improvement in diversifying sentence structures further to enhance coherence and sophistication. For instance, the essay predominantly utilizes simple sentences, with limited incorporation of complex structures.
- How to improve: To enhance the grammatical range and sophistication of the essay, consider incorporating a wider variety of sentence structures. Introduce more complex sentences with subordinate clauses or phrases to convey ideas more elaborately. Additionally, varying the length and structure of sentences can improve the flow and engagement of the essay. Utilizing techniques such as parallelism and inversion can also contribute to stylistic diversity and effectiveness.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates a reasonable level of grammatical accuracy, with few noticeable errors. However, there are instances of grammatical inaccuracies, such as subject-verb agreement errors ("If they continue to abuse these animals, mice will gradually become extinct") and awkward phrasing ("Overview, if experimenters use too much of a new drug on animals, it will cause a lot of harm"). Additionally, there are punctuation errors, including missing commas in compound sentences and inconsistent capitalization.
- How to improve: To improve grammatical accuracy, it’s essential to review subject-verb agreement rules and ensure consistency throughout the essay. Proofreading carefully for punctuation errors, particularly regarding comma usage in compound sentences, can enhance the clarity and coherence of the writing. Consider revising awkward phrasing to improve clarity and coherence. Moreover, paying attention to sentence structure can aid in identifying areas for improvement in grammar and punctuation. Regular practice with grammar exercises and seeking feedback on writing can also facilitate improvement in these areas.

Bài sửa mẫu

From antiquity to the present, numerous new tests have been developed by researchers, and it is common practice to utilize animals for experimentation, particularly in testing new medicines. However, this practice raises questions regarding its ethical implications and potential consequences.

Using excessive amounts of a new drug on animals can result in negative outcomes such as harm and suffering. While experimenting with new drugs on animals is not inherently detrimental and may lead to significant advancements in medicine, overexploitation of animals for this purpose could have dire consequences, including the potential extinction of certain species. For instance, rodents, notably mice, are frequently utilized in pharmaceutical research. Despite their widespread use, it is crucial to recognize that these animals are limited in population, and overexploiting them could lead to their eventual extinction.

Nevertheless, it is essential to acknowledge that the use of animals in medical research does not imply a total absence of benefits. Historically, researchers have diligently worked to develop and synthesize pharmaceuticals to improve human health. For example, during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers swiftly developed pharmaceuticals to combat the virus, which underwent rigorous testing, including trials involving animals, before being approved for human use.

In considering whether the advantages of testing new medicines on animals outweigh the disadvantages, it is a widely held view that human life is prioritized over that of animals. While this perspective may seem controversial, it is grounded in the belief that all actions are goal-oriented and should ultimately contribute to the betterment of human society. Therefore, while the ethical implications of testing on animals should not be dismissed lightly, the potential benefits, including medical advancements that enhance human health and save lives, cannot be overlooked.

In conclusion, while the use of animals in medical research offers more advantages than drawbacks in terms of advancing human health and medical knowledge, it is essential to approach this practice with caution and ethical consideration. Researchers should diligently work to minimize harm to animals and explore alternative methods whenever possible, ensuring that the benefits of testing on animals are balanced against the ethical concerns raised by their use.

Some people think it’s wrong to test new medicines on animals. Do you think the advantages of testing new medicine on animals outweigh the disadvantages?