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?

There has been much controversy about whether testing new drugs on animal brings more benefits or drawbacks. From my perspective, testing new drugs on animal is more disadvantageous.

Some people may think animal testing is a safety measure. Also, this way is quite safe and advantage for all patients. This is because the scientists just test medicine on animal, so they will know a drug’s toxicity and side effect before It is tested in humans. This can help to minimize risk reduction for humans. Furthermore, testing new drug on animal is a way to understand how it works. Animal can help scientists understand how medicines interacts with its body and the side effect of drugs that animal undergo. This knowledge is important for developing effective treatments and It can also led to many medicine that can save our life.

On the other hand, I firmly believe that the drawbacks of testing new medicines on animal is more significant. One clear disadvantages is that It is too cruel and unnecessary for animals to experienced during testing. The reason is that there are lots of alternative methods like cells or computer modeling. Scientists can minimize focusing on animal testing. Another disadvantages of animal testing is that It is not applicable for some people. Because of the difference of human and animal states, some drugs appear safe and effective in animals but It can work on humans and even have negative side effects in humans. So in recently years, I can see a store is called Lush that have an advertisement about fighting animal testing.

In conclusion, it is apparent that testing new medicines on animals offers more disadvantages than advantages. With adequate government funding, we can readily address the challenges faced by researchers and drug research company.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"much controversy" -> "considerable debate"
Explanation: "Considerable debate" is a more formal and precise term that elevates the academic tone of the sentence.
"testing new drugs on animal" -> "the testing of new pharmaceuticals on animals"
Explanation: "The testing of new pharmaceuticals on animals" is more specific and formal, accurately reflecting the scientific context.
"more disadvantageous" -> "more deleterious"
Explanation: "More deleterious" is academically appropriate, conveying a sense of harm in a more sophisticated manner.
"Some people may think" -> "Some individuals may argue"
Explanation: "Some individuals may argue" is more formal and appropriate for an academic essay, avoiding the informal "think."
"quite safe and advantage" -> "relatively safe and beneficial"
Explanation: "Relatively safe and beneficial" is more precise and formal, suitable for an academic context.
"just test medicine on animal" -> "solely conduct pharmaceutical testing on animals"
Explanation: "Solely conduct pharmaceutical testing on animals" is more formal and specific, enhancing the academic tone.
"can help to minimize risk reduction" -> "can aid in minimizing risks"
Explanation: "Can aid in minimizing risks" is more direct and avoids redundancy, making it more suitable for formal writing.
"Animal can help scientists" -> "Animals can assist scientists"
Explanation: "Animals can assist scientists" is more formal and accurate, improving the sentence’s clarity and academic tone.
"It can also led to many medicine" -> "This can also lead to numerous medical"
Explanation: "This can also lead to numerous medical" is more formal and avoids the incorrect use of "led" and "medicine" (singular).
"It is too cruel" -> "It is excessively inhumane"
Explanation: "It is excessively inhumane" elevates the formality and specificity of the statement, fitting better in an academic essay.
"unnecessary for animals to experienced" -> "unnecessary for animals to experience"
Explanation: Correcting "experienced" to "experience" fixes a grammatical error, improving the sentence’s correctness.
"alternative methods like cells or computer modeling" -> "alternative methodologies such as cellular models or computational simulations"
Explanation: "Alternative methodologies such as cellular models or computational simulations" is more precise and academically formal.
"minimize focusing on" -> "reduce reliance on"
Explanation: "Reduce reliance on" is more formal and precise, better suited for academic writing.
"It is not applicable for some people" -> "It may not be applicable to certain individuals"
Explanation: "It may not be applicable to certain individuals" is more accurate and formal, avoiding the overly broad and informal "some people."
"I can see a store is called Lush" -> "There exists a retailer named Lush"
Explanation: "There exists a retailer named Lush" is more formal and avoids the first-person narrative, which is not suitable for academic writing.
"fighting animal testing" -> "opposing animal testing"
Explanation: "Opposing animal testing" is more formal and academically appropriate than the more colloquial "fighting."
"With adequate government funding" -> "With sufficient governmental support"
Explanation: "With sufficient governmental support" is more formal and precise, better aligning with the academic style.
"drug research company" -> "pharmaceutical research companies"
Explanation: "Pharmaceutical research companies" is more specific and formal, accurately reflecting the context.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to address all parts of the question by discussing both advantages and disadvantages of testing new medicines on animals. It acknowledges the perspective of those who support animal testing but ultimately argues that the drawbacks outweigh the benefits.
- How to improve: To enhance the completeness of the response, provide a more balanced evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages. While it’s acceptable to lean towards one side, acknowledging counterarguments in more depth can strengthen the overall argument.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position against testing new medicines on animals, consistently arguing that the disadvantages outweigh the benefits. This stance is evident from the introduction to the conclusion.
- How to improve: To further reinforce the clarity of the position, consider explicitly stating the author’s viewpoint in the introduction and restating it in the conclusion.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay presents ideas but lacks thorough development and support. While it mentions reasons supporting the author’s position, such as safety concerns and ethical issues, these points are not extensively elaborated upon or supported with evidence or examples.
- How to improve: Strengthen the essay by providing more detailed explanations, examples, and evidence to support each point. This could involve citing specific studies, statistics, or real-life examples to bolster the argument.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay mostly stays on topic by discussing the advantages and disadvantages of testing new medicines on animals. However, there are moments where the focus wavers slightly, such as the mention of a specific store’s advertisement against animal testing.
- How to improve: To maintain a tighter focus on the topic, avoid introducing tangential information or examples that do not directly contribute to the argument. Instead, prioritize discussing relevant points in depth.

Overall, while the essay effectively presents a clear stance against testing new medicines on animals, there are opportunities for improvement in terms of comprehensiveness, clarity, development of ideas, and staying strictly on topic. By addressing these areas, the essay could achieve a higher band score.

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 starts with an introduction stating the writer’s perspective, followed by body paragraphs discussing advantages and disadvantages separately, and ends with a conclusion. However, there are instances where the flow of ideas could be smoother. For example, the transition between discussing advantages and disadvantages is abrupt, lacking a clear connection.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, consider using transition phrases to smoothly connect ideas between paragraphs. Additionally, ensure each paragraph focuses on a single point, avoiding mixing advantages and disadvantages within the same paragraph.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay attempts to use paragraphs but lacks consistency and coherence in their structure. There are instances where multiple ideas are presented within the same paragraph, leading to confusion and a lack of clarity.
- How to improve: Aim for clearer paragraphing by focusing on one main idea per paragraph. Begin each paragraph with a clear topic sentence that summarizes the main point, followed by supporting details and examples. This will enhance readability and organization.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as transition words like "furthermore" and "on the other hand." However, their usage is limited, resulting in a lack of variety and coherence in connecting ideas.
- How to improve: Expand the range of cohesive devices used throughout the essay to improve coherence. Consider incorporating a variety of transition words and phrases such as "in addition," "however," "moreover," and "conversely" to create smoother connections between sentences and paragraphs.

Overall, while the essay adequately addresses the prompt and presents arguments for both sides, there is room for improvement in terms of logical organization, paragraph structure, and the use of cohesive devices to enhance coherence and cohesion. Implementing these suggestions will help strengthen the essay’s overall effectiveness and clarity.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 7

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a commendable attempt at employing a variety of vocabulary throughout. For instance, phrases such as "controversy," "disadvantageous," "toxicity," "interacts," "significant," and "applicable" contribute to a diverse lexical range. However, there is room for improvement in the precision and appropriateness of word choice in certain instances.
- How to improve: To further enhance lexical resource, strive for more nuanced vocabulary choices that precisely convey intended meanings. For instance, instead of using "advantageous" and "disadvantageous," consider more descriptive terms like "beneficial" and "detrimental." Additionally, utilize synonyms or related terms to avoid repetition and add depth to the essay’s vocabulary.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates both precise and imprecise vocabulary usage. For example, the phrase "testing new drugs on animal is more disadvantageous" effectively conveys the idea, albeit with a minor grammatical error. Conversely, the phrase "One clear disadvantages is that It is too cruel and unnecessary for animals to experienced during testing" could benefit from more precise language.
- How to improve: Focus on using vocabulary with precision to convey ideas accurately and effectively. Instead of general terms like "disadvantages," specify the particular drawbacks being discussed. For instance, replace "disadvantages" with "drawbacks" or "limitations." Additionally, proofreading for grammatical accuracy will help maintain clarity and precision in expression.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates an acceptable level of spelling accuracy. However, there are a few instances of misspellings and typographical errors, such as "animals to experienced" instead of "animals to experience." These errors slightly detract from the overall clarity and professionalism of the writing.
- How to improve: Utilize spelling and grammar check tools to identify and correct errors before submitting the essay. Additionally, proofreading carefully or seeking feedback from peers can help catch overlooked mistakes. Developing a habit of reviewing written work systematically for spelling accuracy will contribute to improved overall clarity and professionalism.

Overall, while the essay exhibits a strong grasp of vocabulary and demonstrates an understanding of the prompt, refining vocabulary precision and enhancing spelling accuracy will elevate the coherence and effectiveness of the writing. Keep practicing to strengthen these areas and continue striving for linguistic precision and clarity in future essays.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 6

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a moderate range of sentence structures, including simple and compound sentences. However, there is a lack of complexity in sentence structures, with limited use of complex or compound-complex sentences. For instance, "There has been much controversy about whether testing new drugs on animals brings more benefits or drawbacks" is a simple sentence structure. The essay could benefit from incorporating more complex sentence structures to enhance coherence and sophistication.
- How to improve: To improve, try incorporating a variety of sentence structures, such as compound-complex sentences, to add depth and sophistication to your writing. For example, instead of solely using simple sentences, consider combining ideas using subordinating conjunctions or relative clauses. Additionally, vary sentence beginnings and lengths to maintain reader engagement and improve overall fluency.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay generally demonstrates adequate grammatical accuracy, but there are instances of errors throughout the text. For example, "testing new drugs on animal" should be "testing new drugs on animals." Additionally, there are punctuation errors, such as missing commas before introductory phrases ("On the other hand" should be "On the other hand,") and inconsistent capitalization ("It" should be capitalized as "it" in some instances).
- How to improve: To enhance grammatical accuracy, carefully proofread your essay to identify and correct errors. Pay close attention to subject-verb agreement, verb tense consistency, and use of articles. Additionally, review punctuation rules, particularly regarding commas, apostrophes, and capitalization. Consider seeking feedback from peers or utilizing grammar-checking tools to identify and correct errors effectively. Moreover, practice incorporating grammatical structures and punctuation conventions accurately in your writing to reinforce proper usage.

Bài sửa mẫu

There has been considerable debate surrounding the issue of testing new pharmaceuticals on animals, with opinions divided on whether the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. From my perspective, while some individuals may argue that animal testing serves as a safety measure, I believe the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

Some individuals may argue that testing new drugs on animals is a relatively safe and beneficial practice. They contend that by solely conducting pharmaceutical testing on animals, scientists can aid in minimizing risks to human health. Animals can assist scientists in understanding how medicines interact with their bodies and the potential side effects they may experience. This understanding is crucial for the development of effective treatments and can lead to numerous medical advancements.

However, it is excessively inhumane and unnecessary for animals to experience such testing. There exist alternative methodologies such as cellular models or computational simulations that can reduce reliance on animal testing. Moreover, such testing may not be applicable to certain individuals due to differences between human and animal physiology. Drugs that appear safe and effective in animals may not work the same way in humans and could even have deleterious effects. This concern has led to the rise of opposing animal testing movements, exemplified by retailers like Lush who advocate for alternatives.

In conclusion, while testing new medicines on animals may offer some benefits, the drawbacks are more significant. With sufficient governmental support, we can invest in research and development to explore alternative testing methods, thereby mitigating the ethical and practical concerns associated with animal testing for pharmaceutical research companies.

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?