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.
It is an undeniable fact that experimenting on animals is one of the most popular methods for developing a new medicine and testing its safety before administering on human. Some people express their preferences on this strategy due to its benefits to humanity, while others concern about the moral issues involving the process. I personally gravitate towards the first opinion.
On the one hand, medical experiments on animals might raise moral concerns in the society and negative impacts on the biodiversity. Opponents to this medical strategy, especially animal-protection activists, would argue that people have no right to put any species on the verge of suffering from drug testing. It is reasonable to think that we, the human, live in the world that all living species are equally important to keep the balance of biodiversity. In addition, I personally think that it would be morally wrong if we make any test on domestic animals such as dogs or cats because they have been considered as human’s fiends, and in some cases even family members for a hundred of years. However, in reality, the experiments are only applied for some particular animals such as mice and monkeys and the testing procedures are carefully designed to avoid unnecessary traumas causing to the test subjects. Trials on animal can sometimes be cruel, but it can be justified by reducing the medical risk for human.
On the other hand, trials on animal evidently bring about various benefits to humanity. Firstly, any medical product needs to be tested before administrate on people to ensure its safety. If scientists cannot do experiments on animals, they have to try it on human, which is morally worse. Secondly, trials on animals are faster and cheaper in comparing with testing on human. This fact leads to the reduction on the cost of new medication, which allows more people to access to medical support, especially the underprivileged. Finally, if the reliable alternatives to animal experimentation are not available, a certain amount of suffering on animals could be justified as human lives are saved.
In conclusion, using medical experiments on animals for the sake of humanity is always a hot debate in terms of animal rights and moral concerns; however, I personally think that the benefits of this method outweigh its drawbacks.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, while, in addition, in conclusion, such as, in some cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 41.998997996 140% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1957.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 380.0 315.596192385 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93557202305 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534210526316 0.561755894193 95% => OK
syllable_count: 644.4 506.74238477 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.7121596452 49.4020404114 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.3125 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.75 20.7667163134 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.8125 7.06120827912 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.340878551424 0.244688304435 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.105538677146 0.084324248473 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0558894322622 0.0667982634062 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.212383221743 0.151304729494 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0358475644614 0.056905535591 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.0946893788 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 78.4519038076 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.