Search
Vocabularying
Listening
Reading
1. Academic
2. General
Writing
1. IELTSWriting Checker
2. IELTS Writing Samples
Speaking
1. Latest Topics
2. Speaking Club

Do you want to improve your writing? Try our new evaluation service and get detailed feedback.

As public safety public safety is of the highest importance. It is often necessary to test new products on animals. It is better for a few animals to suffer than for human life to be placed at risk by untested products. To what extent do you agree or disagree.

It is true that medicines have to be checked before releasing it as consumable. The best method to check new medicines is testing on animals first than endangering people`s life. In my opinion, government should not take a risk on human`s life, while others would disagree with checking drugs with animals. On the one hand, many people believe that people have no rights to take animals for testing. It is because, immeasurable animals may die due to researches and not only die but also married terrestrial animal species may vanish. In addition, the lives of all creatures should be respected as a human. Thus, many scientists should use alternative methods of research. On the other hand, in my opinion, testing animals can save the majority of people from death. Obviously, many drugs contain a few amount of poison, therefore, non-checked medicines should be tested on animals before giving to people. Moreover, many drugs are always made from snake venom this also leads to death. There are not equal rights between people and animals as well. Take Covid-19 as an example, there are a lot of vaccines for curing people from this virus. In other words, every vaccine tested on animals such as dogs, cats and so on before using in humans. It is, therefore, medicines should be checked on animals first. To conclude, although animals have their own rights in the world and they should be a victim in the research, I believe that it may be the best way to protect people from diseases.

It is true that medicines This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:ought to
have to
 be This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :monitored
checked
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:previouslyprior to
before
 releasing it as consumable. The best method to This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :monitor
check
 new medicines is testing on You use this word too often, consider replacing it withpetbeastcreature
animals
first
 than endangering The character between ‘people’ and ‘s’ is an accent character, not a standard apostrophe character. Use “people’s” (curly apostrophe) or “people’s” (straight apostrophe).people’speople's
people`s
 life. In my opinion, This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :national authoritypublic authority
government
 should not take a This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :hazarddanger
risk
 on The character between ‘human’ and ‘s’ is an accent character, not a standard apostrophe character. Use “human’s” (curly apostrophe) or “human’s” (straight apostrophe).human’shuman's
human`s
 life, while others would disagree with checking drugs with animals.

On the one hand, This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:a plethora ofa number ofnumerous
many
You use this word too often, consider replacing it withcrowdfamilycommunitynationsocietypublic
people
 believe that You use this word too often, consider replacing it withcrowdfamilycommunitynationsocietypublic
people
 have no rights to take You use this word too often, consider replacing it withpetbeastcreature
animals
 for testing. It is This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:due to the factin light of the fact thatowing to the fact that
because
, immeasurable You use this word too often, consider replacing it withpetbeastcreature
animals
 may This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :pass away
die
 due to researches and not This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :exclusively
only
This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :pass away
die
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:on the contrary
but
also
 married terrestrial You use this word too often, consider replacing it withnaturalbodily
animal
 species may vanish. In addition
, the This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :resides
lives
 of all creatures should be respected
 as a human. Thus
, This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:a plethora ofa number ofnumerous
many
 scientists should This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :exploit
use
 alternative methods of research.

On the other hand
, in my opinion, testing You use this word too often, consider replacing it withpetbeastcreature
animals
 can save the majority of You use this word too often, consider replacing it withcrowdfamilycommunitynationsocietypublic
people
 from death. Obviously
, This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:a plethora ofa number ofnumerous
many
 drugs contain a Possible agreement error. The noun amount seems to be countable; consider using: “few amounts”.few amounts
few amount
 of poison, therefore
, non-This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :monitored
checked
 medicines should be This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :evaluated
tested
 on You use this word too often, consider replacing it withpetbeastcreature
animals
This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:previouslyprior to
before
 giving to You use this word too often, consider replacing it withcrowdfamilycommunitynationsocietypublic
people
. Moreover
, This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:a plethora ofa number ofnumerous
many
 drugs are always made from snake venom this also
 leads to death. There are It seems that the adverb “not” is incorrect in this context.no
not
 equal rights between You use this word too often, consider replacing it withcrowdfamilycommunitynationsocietypublic
people
 and You use this word too often, consider replacing it withpetbeastcreature
animals
as well
. Take Covid-19 as an example, there are This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:a plethora ofa number ofnumerous
a lot of
 vaccines for curing You use this word too often, consider replacing it withcrowdfamilycommunitynationsocietypublic
people
 from this virus. In other words
, every vaccine This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :evaluated
tested
 on You use this word too often, consider replacing it withpetbeastcreature
animals
 such as dogs, cats and This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:consequently
so
 on This phrase/word is too simple and can be replaced with:previouslyprior to
before
 using in humans. It is, therefore
, medicines should be This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :monitored
checked
 on You use this word too often, consider replacing it withpetbeastcreature
animals
first
.

To conclude
, although You use this word too often, consider replacing it withpetbeastcreature
animals
 have their This phrase/word (depending on the context) can be potentially replaced with :possess
own
 rights in the Use a comma before ‘and’ if it connects two independent clauses (unless they are closely connected and short).world, and
world and
 they should be a victim in the research, I believe that it may be the best way to protect You use this word too often, consider replacing it withcrowdfamilycommunitynationsocietypublic
people
 from diseases. 