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 civilized.
Traditionalists disagree with the statement that human should stop killing animals or using them to fulfill their needs. From the very beginning of human civilization 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 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 a predators, but as civilized predators we should make sure to use only humane ways of killing.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
IELTS essay: Space research or fighting diseases?
Governments around the world are spending billions in support of space programs. This money would be better spent on research into improvements in human health.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
There is an opinion that countries are spending a lot of their cash assets on space projects while they should rather finance medical science sufficiently. Spaceships are flying all over the Universe at the time people are dying from AIDS or even flu. Is there any point of throwing money into the outer space?
On the one hand, human really have not fought many dangerous and highly contagious diseases. Moreover, industrialization and economical progress brought new diseases as a result of receiving more comfortable life. They are diabetes, cardio-vascular problems, etc. In addition, launching just one space shuttle into the sky requires so
many natural resources and brings so many pollution, that it influences ecology a lot. That brings us new health issues, that need additional funding, which could be withdrawn from excessive payments for space research.
On the other hand, scientists already have fundraising from commercial pharmaceutical companies. A lot of diseases have been fought in just last 100 years and there is an increase in mankind life expectancy. Moreover, improved health and elongated life of population leads to a new problem – overpopulation. Space research can help to find a new home for Earth inhabitants. The last, but not the least, who knows, there is a chance we could found on other planets a panacea for all diseases.
As for me, I am not a very healthy person and my parents either. However, if there is a one, very small chance, that something exciting will happen and astronauts will meet alien civilization on other planets, I would not be happy that government is spending money for medicine only. We have overcrowded planet and we should search for ways of expanding our habitat.
This essay has been checked and graded by the real IELTS teacher. See bellow the teacher's comments:
This is a good essay. It has the right structure, covers the task, the contents is coherent, the sentences are well-structured, the vocabulary and the grammar are fine. Overall, looks like Band 7 essay.
For the whole list of teacher's comments click here.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
There is an opinion that countries are spending a lot of their cash assets on space projects while they should rather finance medical science sufficiently. Spaceships are flying all over the Universe at the time people are dying from AIDS or even flu. Is there any point of throwing money into the outer space?
On the one hand, human really have not fought many dangerous and highly contagious diseases. Moreover, industrialization and economical progress brought new diseases as a result of receiving more comfortable life. They are diabetes, cardio-vascular problems, etc. In addition, launching just one space shuttle into the sky requires so
many natural resources and brings so many pollution, that it influences ecology a lot. That brings us new health issues, that need additional funding, which could be withdrawn from excessive payments for space research.
On the other hand, scientists already have fundraising from commercial pharmaceutical companies. A lot of diseases have been fought in just last 100 years and there is an increase in mankind life expectancy. Moreover, improved health and elongated life of population leads to a new problem – overpopulation. Space research can help to find a new home for Earth inhabitants. The last, but not the least, who knows, there is a chance we could found on other planets a panacea for all diseases.
As for me, I am not a very healthy person and my parents either. However, if there is a one, very small chance, that something exciting will happen and astronauts will meet alien civilization on other planets, I would not be happy that government is spending money for medicine only. We have overcrowded planet and we should search for ways of expanding our habitat.
This essay has been checked and graded by the real IELTS teacher. See bellow the teacher's comments:
This is a good essay. It has the right structure, covers the task, the contents is coherent, the sentences are well-structured, the vocabulary and the grammar are fine. Overall, looks like Band 7 essay.
For the whole list of teacher's comments click here.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
IELTS essay: Computer games or outdoor sports?
Children today are too dependent on computers and electronic entertainment. It would be better for them to be outside playing sports and taking part in more traditional pastimes than spending all day indoors.
Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Together with computerization of our society there is a rising of public awareness about kids, who spend too much time in front of personal computer or playing video games. What it best for children to devote their free time to outdoor activities and conventional games or to be at home and entertain themselves with computer?
Some types of PC games can be very intelligent and may contain huge educational potential. They can encourage youngsters to develop researching skills and inspire them to learn new things. However, significant amount of video games is dumb-type, which develops nothing but button-pushing skill. Unfortunately, these games are usually highly addictive. Thus, they can cause the lack of physical activity and even serious mental diseases.
Outdoor games often more beneficial for kids’ health. They not only train them in terms if agility and endurance, but teach children to socialize and make friends. Moreover, they make them stronger because of fresh air, physical activity and exposure to the sunlight. Therefore, being on the street not always safe. Unattended child can receive trauma or become a subject of crime.
I was not very outgoing and physically active kid and preferred rather to read than to play with others. Getting a computer brought more diversity for my leisure and study. It helped me to experience new emotions, learn new things, study English and meet interesting people online. High information technologies aptitude helped me to get a good job than I grew up. Therefore I think parents should look to their child’s personality in order to decide what is more appropriate. Finding good balance between electronic entertainment and outdoor games depends on parents’ ability to identify what benefits their child best.
Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Together with computerization of our society there is a rising of public awareness about kids, who spend too much time in front of personal computer or playing video games. What it best for children to devote their free time to outdoor activities and conventional games or to be at home and entertain themselves with computer?
Some types of PC games can be very intelligent and may contain huge educational potential. They can encourage youngsters to develop researching skills and inspire them to learn new things. However, significant amount of video games is dumb-type, which develops nothing but button-pushing skill. Unfortunately, these games are usually highly addictive. Thus, they can cause the lack of physical activity and even serious mental diseases.
Outdoor games often more beneficial for kids’ health. They not only train them in terms if agility and endurance, but teach children to socialize and make friends. Moreover, they make them stronger because of fresh air, physical activity and exposure to the sunlight. Therefore, being on the street not always safe. Unattended child can receive trauma or become a subject of crime.
I was not very outgoing and physically active kid and preferred rather to read than to play with others. Getting a computer brought more diversity for my leisure and study. It helped me to experience new emotions, learn new things, study English and meet interesting people online. High information technologies aptitude helped me to get a good job than I grew up. Therefore I think parents should look to their child’s personality in order to decide what is more appropriate. Finding good balance between electronic entertainment and outdoor games depends on parents’ ability to identify what benefits their child best.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
