【精编范文】雅思写作范文：Animal Testing(第三篇)-推荐word版 (1页)
雅思写作模板 雅思写作高频词汇动物类 动物测试animal testing.doc
雅思写作模板雅思写作高频词汇动物类动物测试animal testing今天我们雅思写作的相关文章来研究下动物类话题下是否应该进行动物测试的问题。
跟之前一样，小编会给出题目，相应的雅思写作高分词汇，以及大致的汉语思路。
题目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.现在，动物实验被广泛应用于开发新药品以及测试其他产品的安全性。
一些人认为这些实验应该被禁止，因为给动物造成痛苦是不道德的。
然后另一些人同意动物实验，因为它们对人类有意。
讨论双方观点并给出你的意见。
雅思写作高分词汇-动物类-动物测试animal testingmedicine 医药are routinely tested on animals 常规的在动物身上做测试morally wrong 道德上错误的a limited amount of 有效数量的the development of medicines 药品的开发ethical arguments 道德理由laboratory mice 实验室的小白鼠effectiveness of a new drug 新药品的有效性opponents of such research 这类研究的反对者lives of all creatures should be respected 所有生物的生命都应该被尊重justify the suffering 使痛苦合理化alternative methods 替代方式medical treatment 医疗治疗方式non-medical products 非医药产品necessary evil 必要的恶equally effective alternatives 同样有效的替代方案雅思写作思路-动物类-动物测试animal testing开头段1. 事实如此，药品和其他产品在给人类使用之前，会常规的在动物身上进行实验。
experimentation 雅思写作 animal
experimentation 雅思写作animal全文共四篇示例，供读者参考第一篇示例：实验动物在科学研究中发挥着重要作用，但同时也引发了许多争议。
一些人认为实验动物对于人类医学研究来说是必不可少的工具，可以帮助研究人员了解疾病的发病机制并开发新的治疗方法，从而拯救更多生命。
另一些人则反对使用动物做实验，认为这是对动物权利的侵犯，应该保护动物的福利。
在这种背景下，对于实验动物的使用是一个需要权衡慎重的问题。
值得注意的是实验动物在医学研究中的重要性。
许多重大的科学突破都是通过对动物进行实验得出的。
在癌症研究中，通过在小鼠体内植入人类癌细胞，研究人员能够了解肿瘤的生长和扩散机制，从而开发出针对癌症的新药物。
在心脏病、糖尿病、神经退行性疾病等方面的研究中，实验动物也发挥着重要作用。
实验动物对于人类健康和生命的保障是至关重要的。
使用实验动物也引发了一些伦理和道德问题。
一些人认为，对动物进行实验是对它们权利的侵犯，是一种虐待行为。
实验动物往往会受到疼痛、压力和剥夺自由等不良影响，这对动物的福利造成了严重威胁。
一些人主张应该尽可能减少对实验动物的使用，或者寻找替代方法，以保护动物的权益。
为了平衡这些观点，一些国家制定了一系列法规和准则来规范实验动物的使用。
这些法规通常要求研究人员在进行实验之前必须经过伦理审查，确保实验动物的使用符合伦理准则，并且应该尽可能使用替代方法来代替实验动物。
有些研究可以通过体外细胞培养或计算机模拟来完成，而无需使用活体动物。
研究人员也被要求尽可能减少对实验动物的痛苦和痛苦，确保它们在实验中得到适当的照顾和关爱。
实验动物在科学研究中具有重要作用，但同时也带来了一些伦理和道德问题。
为了平衡这些利弊，我们应该积极推动替代方法的研究和应用，尽可能减少对实验动物的使用，并确保它们在实验中得到适当的关爱和保护。
只有这样，我们才能在保护动物权益的同时推动科学研究的进步，造福人类社会。
第二篇示例：在当今科技飞速发展的社会中，实验动物一直是科学研究中不可或缺的一部分。
雅思写作高分范文赏析：Animal Testing
雅思写作高分范文赏析：Animal TestingAnimal TestingPlease Read This Warning Before You Use This Essay for Anything (It MightSave Your Life) Animal Testing Using animals for testing is wrong and should bebanned. They have rights just as we do. Twenty-four hours a day humans are usingdefenseless animals for cruel and most often useless tests. The animals have noway of fighting back. This is why there should be new laws to protect them.These legislations also need to be enforced more regularly. Too many criminalsget away with murder. Although most labs are run by private companies, oftenexperiments are conducted by public organizations. The US government, Army andAir force in particular, has designed and carried out many animal experiments.The purposed experiments were engineered so that many animals would suffer anddie without any certainty that this suffering and death would save a singlelife, or benefit humans in anyway at all; but the same can be said for tens ofthousands of other experiments performed in the US each year. Limiting it tojust experiments done on beagles, the following might sock most people： Forinstance, at the Lovelace Foundation, Albuquerque, New Mexico, experimentersforced sixty-four beagles to inhale radioactive Strontium 90as part of a larger^Fission Product Inhalation Program^ which began in 1961 and has been paid forby the US Atomic Energy Commission. In this experimentTwenty-five of the dogseventually died. One of the deaths occurred during anepileptic seizure; anotherfrom a brain hemorrhage. Other dogs, before death, became feverish and anemic,lost their appetites, and had hemorrhages. The experimentersin their publishedreport, compared their results with that of other experiments conducted at theUniversity of Utah and the Argonne National Laboratory in which beagles wereinjected with Strontium 90. They concluded that the dose needed to produce^early death^ in fifty percent of the sample group differed from test to testbecause the dogs injected with Strontium 90 retain more of the radioactivesubstance than dogs forced to inhale it. Also, at the University of RochesterSchool Of Medicine a group of experimenters put fifty beagles in wooden boxesand irradiated them with different levels of radiation by x-rays. Twenty-one ofthe dogs died within the first two weeks. The experimenters determined the doseat which fifty percent of the animals will die with ninety-five percentconfidence. The irritated dogs vomited, had diarrhea, andlost their appetites.Later, they hemorrhaged from the mouth, nose, and eyes. In their report, theexperimenters compared their experiment to others of the same nature that eachused around seven hundred dogs. The experimenters said that the injuriesproduced in their own experiment were ^Typical of those described for the dog^(Singer 30). Similarly, experimenters for the US Food and Drug Administrationgave thirty beagles and thirty pigs large amounts of Methoxychlor (a pesticide)in their food, seven days a week for six months, ^In order to insure tissuedamage^ (30). Within eight weeks, eleven dogs exhibited signs of ^abnormalbehavior^ including nervousness, salivation, muscle spasms, and convolutions.Dogs in convultions breathed as rapidly as two hundred times a minute beforethey passed out from lack of oxygen. Upon recovery from an episode ofconvulsions and collapse, the dogs were uncoordinated, apparently blind, and anystimulus such as dropping a feeding pan, squirting water, or touching theanimals initiated another convulsion. After further experimentation on anadditional twenty beagles, the experimenters concluded that massive daily dosesof Methoxychlor produce different effects in dogs from those produced in pigs.These three examples should be enough to show that the Air force beagleexperiments were in no way exceptional. Note that all of these experiments,according to the experimenters^ own reports, obviously caused the animals tosuffer considerably before dying. No steps were taken to prevent this suffering,even when it was clear that the radiation or poison had made the animalsextremely sick. Also, these experiments are parts of series of similarexperiments, repeated with only minor variations, that are being carried out allover the country. These experiments Do Not save human lives or improve them inany way. It was already known that Strontium 90 is unhealthy before the beaglesdied; and the experimenters who poisoned dogs and pigs with Methoxychlor knewbeforehand that the large amounts they were feeding the animals (amounts nohuman could ever consume) would cause damage. In any case, as the differingresults they obtained on pigs and dogs make it clear, it isnot possible toreach any firm conclusion about the effects of a substance on humans from testson other species. The practice of experimenting on non-human animals as itexists today throughout the world reveals the brutal consequences of speciesism(Singer 29). In this country everyone is supposed to be equal, but apparentlysome people just don^t have to obey the law. That is, in New York and some otherstates, licensed laboratories are immune from ordinary anticruelty laws, andthese places are often owned by state universities, city hospitals, or even TheUnited States Public Health Service. It seems suspicious that some governmentrun facilities could be ^immune^ from their own laws (Morse 19). In relation,^No law requires that cosmetics or household products betested on animals.Nevertheless, by six^o clock this evening, hundreds of animals will have theireyes, skin, or gastrointestinal systems unnecessarily burned or destroyed. Manyanimals will suffer and die this year to produce ^new^ versions of deodorant,hair spray, lipstick, nail polish, and lots of otherproducts^ (Sequoia 27).Some of the largest cosmetics companies use animals to test their products.These are just a couple of the horrifying tests they use, namely, the DrazieTest. The Drazie test is performed almost exclusively on albino rabbits. Theyare preferred because they are docile, cheap, and their eyes do not shed tears(so chemicals placed in them do not wash out). They are also the test subject ofchoice because their eyes are clear, making it easier to observe destruction ofeye tissue; their corneal membranes are extremely susceptible to injury. Duringeach test the rabbits are immobilized (usually in a ^stock^, with only theirheads protruding) and a solid or liquid is placed in the lower lid of one eye ofeach rabbit. These substances can range from mascara to aftershave to ovencleaner. The rabbits^ eyes remain clipped open. Anesthesia is almost neveradministered. After that, the rabbits are examined at intervals of one,twenty-four, forty-eight, seventy-two, and one hundred an sixty-eight hours.Reactions, which may range from severe inflammation, to clouding of the cornea,to ulceration and rupture of the eyeball, are recorded by technicians. Somestudies continue for a period of weeks. No other attempt is made to treat therabbits or to seek any antidotes. The rabbits who survive the Drazie test maythen be used as subjects for skin-inflammation tests (27). Another widely usedprocedure is the LD-50. This is the abbreviation of the Lethal Dose 50 test.LD-50 is the lethal dose of something that will kill fifty percent of allanimals in a group of forty to two hundred. Most commonly, animals areforce-feed substances (which may be toothpaste, shaving cream, drain cleaner,pesticides, or anything else they want to test) through a stomach tube andobserved for two weeks or until death. Non-oral methods of administering thetest include injection, forced inhalation, or application to animals skin.Symptoms routinely include tremors, convultions, vomiting, diarrhea, paralysis,or bleeding from the eyes, nose, mouth. Animals that survive are destroyed (29).Additionally, when one laboratory^s research on animals establishes somethingsignificant, scores of other labs repeat the experiment, and more thousands ofanimals are needlessly tortured and killed (Morse 8). Fewlabs buy their animaltest subjects from legitimate pet stores and the majority use illegal petdealers. There are many stolen animal dealers that house the animals before,during , and after testing. These ^farms^ most frequently hold animals betweentests while the animals recuperate, before facing another research ordeal. Theseso called farms in question are mainly old barn-like buildings used as hospitalsand convalescent (recovery) wards are filthy, overcrowded pens. At one farm inparticular dogs with open chest wounds and badly infected incisions, so weakthat many could not stand, were the order of the day. These dogs were^recuperating^ from open-heart and kidney surgery. Secondly, a litter oftwo-day-old pups were found in a basket, with no food provisions in sight (Morse19). In every pen there were dogs suffering from highly contagious diseases. Ananimal^s road to a lab is seldom a direct one. Whether he^s stolen picked up asa stray, or purchased, there^s a de tour first to the animal dealer^s farm;There he waits- never under satisfactory conditions- until his ride, and oftenlife, comes to an end at the laboratory (23). Every day of the year, hundreds ofthousands of fully conscious animals are scalded, or beaten, or crushed todeath, and more are subjected to exotic surgery and then allowed to die slowlyand in agony. There is no reason for this suffering to continue (Morse 8). Inconclusion, animal testing is inhumane and no animal should be forced to enduresuch torture. Waste in government is one thing; it seems to be an acceptedliability of democracy. But the wasting of lives is something else. How did itever get this way?BibliographyFox, Michael Allen. The Case For Animal Experimentation. Los Angeles：University Of California Press, 1986. Jasper, James M. and Dorothy Nelkin, eds.The Animal Rights Crusade. New York： Macmillion Inc., 1992, 103-56. Morse, Mel.Ordeal Of The Animals. Englewood Cliffs： Prentice-Hall International, 1968.Sequoia, Anna. 67 Ways To Save The Animals. New York： Harper Collins, 1990.Singer, Peter. Animal Liberation. New York： Random House, 1975. OUTLINE I.Introduction II. Supporting evidence on testing A. Experiments funded by USgovernment 1. Strontium 90 2. Irradiation by X-rays 3. Methoxychlor B.Background on laws in US C. Examples of tests 1. The Drazie Test 2. The LD-50Test D. What the animals go through 1. Trip to the laboratory 2. Their stay atthe lab 3. After the tests are done III. Conclusion。
如何看待动物实验英文作文
如何看待动物实验英文作文英文：Animal testing is a controversial topic that has been debated for decades. Some people argue that it is necessary for scientific research and medical advancements, while others believe it is cruel and inhumane. Personally, I believe that animal testing should be minimized as much as possible and alternative methods should be explored.One reason for my stance is that animals are living beings and should not be subjected to unnecessary harm and suffering. It is unethical to use animals for testing cosmetic products or other non-essential items. However, I understand that some medical research requires animal testing in order to develop treatments and cures for diseases. In these cases, I believe that strict regulations and guidelines should be put in place to ensure that animals are treated as humanely as possible.Another reason for my stance is that there are alternative methods that can be used instead of animal testing. For example, computer models and in vitro testing can be used to simulate the effects of drugs and chemicals on human cells. These methods are more cost-effective and do not involve the use of animals. In addition, they can provide more accurate results as they are based on human biology rather than animal biology.In conclusion, while I understand that animal testing has been used for many years and has contributed to important medical advancements, I believe that it should be minimized as much as possible. Animals should not be subjected to unnecessary harm and suffering, andalternative methods should be explored.中文：动物实验是一个备受争议的话题，已经争论了几十年。
动物实验相关的雅思英语作文
动物实验相关的雅思英语作文动物实验相关的雅思英语作文为了人类的利益，应该进行动物实验吗? 下面是店铺整理的关于动物实验的雅思英语作文，大家可以参考参考。
题目：You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.Should experiments be conducted on animals for the benefit of human beings?You should write at least 250 words. You should use your own ideas of knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence.参考范文：Every day, thousands of people are saved from painful diseases and death by powerful medical drugs and treatments. This incredible gift of medicine would not be possible without animal testing. Despite these overwhelming benefits, however, some people are calling for animal testing to be banned because of alleged cruelty. This essay will examine arguments for and against animal testing.Those against the use of animal testing claim that it is inhumane to use animals in experiments. I disagree completely. It would be much more inhumane to test new drugs on children or adults. Even if it were possible, it would also take much longer to see potential effects, because of the length of time we live compared to laboratory animals such as rats or rabbits.Opponents of animal testing also claim that the results are not applicable to humans. This may be partly true. Some drugs have had to be withdrawn, despite testing. However, we simply do not have alternative methods of testing. Computer models arenot advanced enough, and testing on plants is much less applicable to humans than tests on animals such as monkeys. Until we have a better system, we must use animal testing.参考翻译每天，成千上万的人通过强大的药物和治疗从痛苦的疾病和死亡中拯救出来。
动物实验英语作文
动物实验英语作文In recent times, the use of animals for experimental purposes has sparked a heated debate. While scientific research has undoubtedly benefited from animal testing, the ethical considerations surrounding this practice are complex and multifaceted. This essay aims to explore the arguments for and against animal experimentation, considering both the scientific necessity and the moral implications.Proponents of animal testing argue that it is a crucial component of medical and scientific advancement. Animals, they claim, provide a biologically similar model to humans, allowing researchers to study the effects of drugs, diseases, and other variables in a controlled environment. The use of animals has led to significant breakthroughs in various fields, including pharmacology, toxicology, and neuroscience. For instance, insulin for diabetes treatment and the development of vaccines for polio and COVID-19 have been made possible through animal research.However, critics of animal testing contend that it is both morally and ethically wrong. They believe that animals have intrinsic rights and should not be subjected to pain or suffering for human benefit. The Animal Welfare Act and the Three Rs (Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement) have been established to minimize the use of animals and alleviatetheir suffering. The Replacement principle encourages the development of alternative methods, such as in vitro testingand computer modeling. Reduction aims to use the minimum number of animals necessary to obtain valid results, while Refinement focuses on improving experimental procedures to reduce animal distress.Another concern is the relevance of animal testing results to humans. Critics argue that species differences can lead to misleading outcomes when applying findings from animal studies to human health. This has led to a push for more sophisticated alternatives that better mimic human biology.In conclusion, the issue of animal testing is not black and white. While it has contributed to scientific progress, it is essential to continuously evaluate the ethical framework within which it operates. As society progresses, the emphasis should be on seeking alternative methods that reduce our reliance on animals, ensuring that scientific advancement does not come at the expense of animal welfare.。
动物实验做雅思作文
动物实验做雅思作文Animal testing, a topic surrounded by controversies, has been a part of medical and scientific research for centuries. It involves the use of animals to test new drugs, medical procedures, and chemicals, with the goal of improving human health and diseases.Despite the progress it has led to in the fields of medicine and science, animal testing is often criticized for its ethical concerns and the potential harm it causes to animals. Animal rights activists argue that animals have the right to live free from unnecessary suffering and Experimentation. They claim that alternative methods, such as computer simulations and cell cultures, could be used instead, which would cause less harm to animals.However, many scientists and researchers argue that animal testing is necessary and crucial for the advancement of medical knowledge. They believe that without animal testing, medical progress would be severely hindered, and many life-saving treatments and vaccines would not be possible. They also argue thatanimal models are essential for understanding the human body and diseases, and that replacing them with alternatives would not be as effective.In recent years, there has been a growing movement towards reducing the number of animals used in testing and finding alternatives to replace them. Many countries have implemented strict regulations and guidelines for animal testing, requiring researchers to minimize animal suffering and find alternatives when possible.In conclusion, animal testing is a complex and controversial issue. While it has contributed significantly to medical and scientific advancements, it also raises ethical concerns and questions about the treatment of animals. It is important to continue searching for alternatives and improving the ethical standards of animal testing to minimize the harm it causes.中文翻译:动物实验，一个充满争议的话题，已经成为医学和科学研究几个世纪的组成部分。
最新整理雅思写作高分范文赏析：Animal Testing
states, licensed laboratories are immune from ordinary anticruelty laws, and
(so chemicals placed in them do not wash out). They are also the test subject of
choice because their eyes are clear, making it easier to observe destruction of
thousands of other experiments performed in the US each year. Limiting it to
just experiments done on beagles, the following might sock most people: For
extremely sick. Also, these experiments are parts of series of similar
experiments, repeated with only minor variations, that are being carried out all
over the country. These experiments Do Not save human lives or improve them in
any way. It was already known that Strontium 90 is unhealthy before the beagles
【优质文档】雅思写作参考范文：动物实验-范文word版 (1页)
【优质文档】雅思写作参考范文：动物实验-范文word版本文部分内容来自网络整理，本司不为其真实性负责，如有异议或侵权请及时联系，本司将立即删除！== 本文为word格式，下载后可方便编辑和修改！ ==雅思写作参考范文：动物实验雅思写作参考范文Topic ： Animal testing may be necessary , but we need to be be mercifulEvery year , millions of animals undergo painful suffering or death as a result of scientific research into the effects of drugs , food additives , cosmetics and other chemical products . While most people think animal testing is necessary , others are upset by what they see as needless suffering . This essay looks at some of the positive and negative aspects of animal testing .Many medical treatments and procedures have been developed from experiments on animals . Since animals share many features with humans , scientists use animals to test the safety and effectiveness of newly developed drugs before pilot testing on small groups of patients . Medical teams practice new operating techniques such as transplants on animals . Without animal testing , many procedures or new drugs would be extremely unsafe .However , many people are concerned that animals are suffering unnecessarily and cruelly . They do not believe that every new drug needs to be tested on animals , especially with the huge database of knowledge and modern computer models . They also are worried that many animal tests are ineffective , pointing out that any drugs have had to be withdrawn from the market despite extensive testing . They particularly feel that animal testing should not be used for non - essential products such as cosmetics , shampoos , soaps , and cleaning products . Furthermore , some campaigners would like to see certain tests replaced and more humane methods used .。
动物实验的利弊辩论雅思作文
动物实验的利弊辩论雅思作文一、动物实验的好处。
（一）医疗进步方面。
1. 救命的突破。
嘿呀，动物实验在医疗领域那可是大功臣呢！就拿药物研发来说吧。
咱们人类想要研制出能治疗各种疑难杂症的新药，可不能直接就拿人来试药呀，那多危险。
这时候动物就像我们的小替身一样。
比如说治疗糖尿病的胰岛素，最开始就是在狗身上做实验才发现的。
如果没有那些勇敢的小狗先尝试，那现在无数的糖尿病患者可就惨咯，说不定还在天天遭受病痛的折磨，只能眼巴巴地等着死神来敲门呢。
2. 疾病研究的窗口。
动物和人类在生理结构和机能上有很多相似之处，它们就像是一扇窗户，让科学家们能窥视到疾病在生物体内的运作方式。
像研究癌症，科学家可以在老鼠身上制造相似的肿瘤模型。
老鼠繁殖快、生命周期短，这样就能在短时间内观察癌症的发生、发展过程，研究不同的治疗方法对肿瘤的影响。
要是没有动物实验这个得力助手，咱们对癌症这种超级复杂的疾病就只能像盲人摸象一样，摸到一点算一点，很难全面深入地了解它。
（二）安全性保障方面。
1. 产品安全把关。
在日常生活里，咱们用的好多东西都得经过安全性检测，化妆品、食品添加剂啥的。
把这些东西先在动物身上做实验，就像是先派个小侦察兵去探探路。
要是直接用到人身上，万一有个闪失，那可就麻烦大了。
比如有些化妆品可能含有对皮肤或者身体有害的成分，要是没有在兔子耳朵上或者小白鼠皮肤上先做测试，直接往咱们脸上抹，说不定就会引起严重的过敏反应，把好好的一张脸弄得像个大花脸，还可能有更严重的健康问题呢。
二、动物实验的弊端。
（一）动物权益问题。
1. 伦理道德的拷问。
从伦理道德的角度看，动物实验真的有点残忍呢。
那些小动物在实验室里被关着，接受各种可能会让它们痛苦的实验操作。
它们又没做错什么，凭什么要遭受这样的待遇呢？就像那些小猴子，被用来做一些脑部实验或者行为实验的时候，被限制自由，还可能会被注射一些奇怪的东西，感觉就像是把它们的生活完全打乱，只是为了满足人类的好奇心或者研究需求。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
【精编范文】雅思写作范文：Animal Testing(第三篇)-推荐word版
本文部分内容来自网络整理，本司不为其真实性负责，如有异议或侵权请及时联系，本司将立即删除！
== 本文为word格式，下载后可方便编辑和修改！ ==
雅思写作范文：Animal Testing(第三篇)
Advantages of Animal Testing in Medical Research
Medical research involving animals has dramatically improved the health of the human race . Without animal testing , the cure for
polio would not exist and diabetics would suffer or die from their disease . Despite these benefits , some people believe that animals should be not be used for testing medical techniques and drugs . This essay will outline the advantages of animal testing .
Animal testing allows scientists to test and create new drugs . Animals such as monkeys or rabbits have similar physical processes to humans . This allows scientists to test the effects of certain drugs . If a drug produces adverse effects in animals it is probably unfit
for human use .
Animal testing is cheap . There is a large supply of animals for medical research . Animals are easily bred , and maintained safely in controlled labs . The costs of testing in humans would be extremely high .
Many people argue that animal testing is cruel . In some cases this is true . However it would be much more cruel to test new drugs on people or children , or to let people die because there was not enough information about a drug . Furthermore , legislation in most countries sets standards for animal treatment , and laboratories have guidelines to prevent cruelty .
Opponents of animal research also say that information from animals does not apply to humans . They point to certain commercial drugs which have been withdrawn because of side - effects in humans While it is true that animal systems differ from human systems ,
there are enough similarities to apply information from animals to humans .。