问题描述：
马上雅思考试了,请大家帮我看看作文,给个分数顺便,
Some people think it is necessary to use animals for testing medicines intended for human use.others ,however,think it is not right to do that.discuss both of the views and give you own opinion
Nowadays in order to test if a medicine is suitable and safe for humans ,it is always been used on animals in the first place.However,there are different ideas on this topic,some are supportive ,while the others are opposite to it.In my view,using animals as experimental subjects has an undeniable advantage.
Undoubtedly,people who agree with the view of testing medicines on animals suppose humanbeings are prior to animals.This policy might bring about benefits in two followed aspects,which are economy and social inflence.Honestly,enterprises choose animals to test their medicines which have not sell in the market is not without reasons.Buying animals such as rats is much too economical than hiring a person to cooperate with the experiment.Additionally,if the experiment lead to a damaging result,the enterprise would have to pay a huge amount of compensation to a man but nothing to a animal .Secondly ,social inflence is another element that has to be considered.A failed testing on animals and on humanbeings will lead to totally different feedbacks from society.All in all,people care more about their silblings.
Testing medicines on animals is not environmental friendly at all.Although taking tests on animals poses these advantages above ,it is still unacceptable for some people,since the nature of testing unknown medicines on animals is putting them in a risky place.Many animal protectors are angered by the behavior of ignoring animals` right of living.To a certain extent,these people regard animals as a part of nature as equal as humanbeings,because they are both living creatures.
As far as I am concerned,I propose that testing medicines on animals would be a smarter decision,if the pharmaceutical companies try their best to reduce the risk that animals being harmed.
Some people think it is necessary to use animals for testing medicines intended for human use.others ,however,think it is not right to do that.discuss both of the views and give you own opinion
Nowadays in order to test if a medicine is suitable and safe for humans ,it is always been used on animals in the first place.However,there are different ideas on this topic,some are supportive ,while the others are opposite to it.In my view,using animals as experimental subjects has an undeniable advantage.
Undoubtedly,people who agree with the view of testing medicines on animals suppose humanbeings are prior to animals.This policy might bring about benefits in two followed aspects,which are economy and social inflence.Honestly,enterprises choose animals to test their medicines which have not sell in the market is not without reasons.Buying animals such as rats is much too economical than hiring a person to cooperate with the experiment.Additionally,if the experiment lead to a damaging result,the enterprise would have to pay a huge amount of compensation to a man but nothing to a animal .Secondly ,social inflence is another element that has to be considered.A failed testing on animals and on humanbeings will lead to totally different feedbacks from society.All in all,people care more about their silblings.
Testing medicines on animals is not environmental friendly at all.Although taking tests on animals poses these advantages above ,it is still unacceptable for some people,since the nature of testing unknown medicines on animals is putting them in a risky place.Many animal protectors are angered by the behavior of ignoring animals` right of living.To a certain extent,these people regard animals as a part of nature as equal as humanbeings,because they are both living creatures.
As far as I am concerned,I propose that testing medicines on animals would be a smarter decision,if the pharmaceutical companies try their best to reduce the risk that animals being harmed.
问题解答：
我来补答展开全文阅读