Should Animal Experiments Be Banned

“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 views and give your own opinion.”

Annotated response

4 correction notes

Showing 4 correction notes.

Vivisection, or the practice of performing operations on live animals for medical research, has long been a sensitive issue, provoking various arguments for and against it. Although there is no denying the fact that experimenting on animals is cruel, I would still argue that it is necessary.

On the one hand, those arguing against vivisection claim that experimentation on animals in the name of medical science is downright cruel, regardless of the benefits. As a matter of fact, animals, are born and reared directly in the laboratory to be exposed to certain chemicals and even viruses like HIV, which oftentimes have led to their death. often hold firmly to the belief that animals, in the same way as man, have feelings and therefore deserve animal rights. However, I believe that from mere sentimental anthropomorphism and human beings do have the right to operate on animals for the sake of medical research.

Advocates of vivisection, on the other hand, argue that it is morally right and sound, on principle, that humans make use of animals for the sake of humanity. Indeed, this is the way for us humans to survive and prosper as the most advanced species on the planet and to ensure our continued evolutionary success. History has shown that the direct experimentation on animals has resulted in many of the greatest inventions in the field of medicine that have saved countless human lives. For example, the advent of vaccination would never have been possible without the experimentation on mice. Cruel as it may be to operate on animals, it would be even more cruel to let animal rights stand in the way of solving some of the most serious plights and plagues, which have claimed millions of human lives.

In conclusion, I believe that it is acceptable to operate on animals for medical research as this practice has yielded many useful medical inventions that have allowed human beings to survive and thrive up until the present day.

Overall assessment

Why this response received Band 7.5

The response presents both views and maintains a clear position supporting medical research, with a wide vocabulary and generally controlled complex sentences. The main limitation is reliance on broad assertions, particularly the absolute claim about vaccination and mice, instead of carefully qualified support for why the claimed benefits justify the acknowledged harm.

IELTS criteria

How each score was decided

Task Response

7.0

Both views are discussed and a consistent position supports medical research. The opposition is explained before being rebutted, but the claim that vaccination would never have been possible without experiments on mice is absolute and unsupported within the response. The justification for overriding animal suffering would benefit from more careful reasoning.

Coherence and Cohesion

7.0

Ideas progress logically with clear paragraphing and effective cohesive devices such as 'on the one hand' and 'on the other hand', with only occasional mechanical linking within sentences.

Lexical Resource

8.0

Vocabulary is flexible and precise, featuring items like 'sentimental anthropomorphism', 'evolutionary success', and 'plights and plagues', with rare spelling slips that do not impede meaning.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy

7.0

A wide range of complex structures, including concessive forms and relative clauses, is generally controlled. The singular subject this belief needs stems rather than stem. This is a specific agreement lapse, rather than an established recurring pattern throughout the essay.