Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.
Check Your Text it's free

Animals should not be used for the benefit of human beings unless there is evidence that the animals do not suffer in any way. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

There is a lot of controversy about using animals for human needs. Animal rights activists are trying to stop all modern and traditional activities, which involve killing animals or cause their suffering. Traditionalists are trying to convince the community that using living creatures for men's needs is natural and cannot be avoided in everyday life. In this essay, we will explore this subject. Activists, who defend animal rights, are telling the world that people should not use animals in any way. Moreover, they say that animals should have exactly same rights as humans do. The reason is that people and animals are both living creatures and there shouldn't be any difference in treating them. So-called extreme vegans are refusing to eat any food of animal origin, even milk or honey. They are trying to convince people to do the same using as an argument that killing animals and keeping them in captivity cause their suffering and not civilised. Traditionalists disagree with the statement that human should stop killing animals or using them to fulfil their needs. From the very beginning of human civilisation, there is a tradition and vital need to use animals as a food and their parts in traditional crafts. Without proteins and vitamins of animal origin, the human body wouldn't receive all nutrients it needs. Moreover, testing some medicals on animals already helped to fight many diseases people suffered from. I think, people have the moral right to use animals to their benefit, to some extent. I am sure, we should not cause them suffer and die for our fun. Although, using animals for food is natural for humans as predators, but as civilised predators, we should make sure to use only humane ways of killing. Animals should not be used for the benefit of human beings unless there is evidence that the animals do not suffer in any way. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
There is
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
a lot of
controversy about using
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
for
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
human
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
needs
.
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Animal
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
activists are trying to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
stop
all modern and traditional activities, which involve
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
killing
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
or cause their suffering. Traditionalists are trying to convince the community that using living creatures for
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
men
's
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
needs
is natural and cannot
be avoided
in everyday life. In this essay, we will explore this subject.

Activists, who defend
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animal
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
, are telling the world that
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
should not
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
in any way.
Moreover
, they say that
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
should have exactly same
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
rights
as
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
humans
do. The reason is that
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
and
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
are both living creatures and there shouldn't be any difference in treating them.
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
So
-called extreme vegans are refusing to eat any food of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animal
origin, even milk or honey. They are trying to convince
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
to do the same using as an argument that
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
killing
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
and keeping them in captivity cause their suffering and not civilised.

Traditionalists disagree with the statement that
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
human
should
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
stop
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
killing
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
or using them to fulfil their
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
needs
. From the
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
very
beginning of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
human
civilisation, there is a tradition and vital
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
need
to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
as a food and their parts in traditional crafts. Without proteins and vitamins of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animal
origin, the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
human
body wouldn't receive all nutrients it
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
needs
.
Moreover
, testing
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
some
medicals on
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
already
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
helped
to fight
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
many
diseases
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
suffered from.

I
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
think
,
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
people
have the moral
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
right
to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
to their benefit, to
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
some
extent. I am sure, we should not cause them suffer and
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
die
for our fun. Although, using
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
for food is natural for
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
humans
as predators,
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:
but
as civilised predators, we should
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
make
sure to
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
use
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
only
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
humane
ways of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
killing
.
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
Animals
should not be
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
used
for the benefit of
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
human
beings unless there is evidence that the
You use this word too often, consider replacing it with
animals
do not suffer in any way.

To what extent do you
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :
agree
or disagree with this statement?

IELTS essay Animals should not be used for the benefit of human beings unless there is evidence that the animals do not suffer in any way. with this statement?

Essay
  American English
5 paragraphs
324 words
6.0
Overall Band Score
Coherence and Cohesion: 5.5
  • Structure your answers in logical paragraphs
  • ?
    One main idea per paragraph
  • Include an introduction and conclusion
  • Support main points with an explanation and then an example
  • Use cohesive linking words accurately and appropriately
  • Vary your linking phrases using synonyms
Lexical Resource: 5.5
  • Try to vary your vocabulary using accurate synonyms
  • Use less common question specific words that accurately convey meaning
  • Check your work for spelling and word formation mistakes
Grammatical Range: 6.5
  • Use a variety of complex and simple sentences
  • Check your writing for errors
Task Achievement: 6.0
  • Answer all parts of the question
  • ?
    Present relevant ideas
  • Fully explain these ideas
  • Support ideas with relevant, specific examples
Labels Descriptions
  • ?
    Currently is not available
  • Meet the criteria
  • Doesn't meet the criteria
Recent posts





Get more results for topic:
  • Animals should not be used for the benefit of human beings unless there is evidence that the animals do not suffer in any way. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?