Question

rozprawka

j. angielski

temat:
- Nie ma przekonujacych powodow, by wykorzystywac zwierzeta do doswiadczen medycznych.

200-250 słów ;]

Answer 1

czytając twoja prace, ktora komus napisalas i widzę, że umiesz ze słownika korzystać ;p dlatego jak coś trudnego jest, to sobie zmień na synonim np. of big importance - unrevelant/not important etc.

 

"There is no convicning reasons to use animals to medical experiments". I will try to say whether that is true or not.

Haven't you always wanted to have a little, cute doggie  ? Maybe you did get one ? Not that it is of a big importance, but let's now imagine that little sweet pet having made experiments on him. I mean something like cutting his legs and then sewing them to another pet. Yes, I am over exaggerating the things, but that's one of the experiments that were being done on human during World War II - do you think that the animals are treated more nicely ? Testing drugs on them, going through unimaginable pain – that’s what they go through. But maybe I am just over exaggerating things again. You wouldn’t wish that even upon the worst enemy, but to your little, cute doggie ? It this paragraph I wanted to point that the phrase "animal like treatment" of people in Nazi concentration camps isn't without the reason.

In this paragraph I would like to point what about these experiments ? What would happen to them ? Where were we to test the new medications on ? On humans ? Now you think: "why, on the other hand, don't sacrifice an animal or two ?" But then another things comes across your mind - "but what about the rats ? Do they apply to the animals too ?" Yes, they are - an animal is an animal. "But they are just rats ..."Yes, and so you are a human, just a plain human. Also the Chinese don't really think too warmly about the dogs too. But this example shows the two different views - but how many of them are there ? These experiments has to be done in order to not stop the development of the medicine. The only question is - on whom the experiments will be made. On the summary, isn't it better to just make these experiments on animal, than on humans or rather do not make them at all ?

To sum it all up, the experiments has to be done, and there are convincing reasons to do so. Of course, there should be specified law restrictions about that. If there wasn’t for them, the growth of the medicine would stop. Don’t you think, that sudden progress that medicine had made in the latest century was without a reason ? What do you think that had been done in the Nazi concentration camp ? The research, the cruel experiments, but on humans. So the summary is, that the animals should be treated better, but the experiments are to be made nonetheless.