Topic: A growing number of people feel that animals should not be exploited by people and that they should have the same rights as humans, while others argue that humans must employ animals to satisfy their various needs, including uses for food and research.

Discuss both views and give your opinion?

My essay:

More and more people argue that animals should be protected from human exploitation and we should grant rights for them which is similar to humans. While others believe that animals are essential parts providing resources for daily meals and research to enhance people’s lives. Personally, I can understand the opposing points of views people should employ it or not.

On the one hand, we can see that animals do not feel pain in the same way as humans. Their nervous systems are less developed. Therefore, animals should be sacrificed to do some good for human such as food and research serving. For instance, to test potentially life-saving medicine. The pain we inflict on an animal through animal testing, is far less devastating to a life than the pain we seek to cure in a human being’s life. In addition, animals do not share in the network of duties and responsibilities that give people right. For that reason, in order to get rights, it requires contribution to society in the form of taxes, voting and so on. Animal do none of that. Therefore, it is fairly inappropriate to grant animals rights in the same way as we grant rights to humans

On the other hand, some people argue that we should treat animals like as humans and there are increasing numbers of people disproving to exploit animals. If so, people can not provide to their body enough essential nutrition for diversity daily activities, we will get sick easier. Moreover, without medicine testing on animal, people will not discover treatment or increase the likelihood of human errors to cure diseases for patients. Therefore, It leads to people have to suffer more diseases.

Inconclusion, using animal for the right purpose to make our lives better is more favorable than prohibiting, however, we have to protect animals from cruel and unnecessary pain.

1 2

It would be nice to get some thanks or acknowledgment for my prior feedback on your writing. I am getting discouraged from helping you further.

Hi AlpheccaStars I am so sorry for my bad behaviours. Honestly, I am really grateful for your helps. You were correcting my essay, providing me useful advices. I can see you have put your dedication on it. After every your feedback, I have known to correct my mistakes and I saved it for reviewing in the next times. As a result, my writing skills have been significantly improved by your helps. I admit I had the lack of giving thanks and acknowledgment for you, I hope you'll forgive me for that. One thing I have to say that I didn't know how to feedback more after your feedback and I was afraid of bothering you more.

Anyway, I am profoundly apologetic. You are a dedicated teacher. You have helped me and lots of other people.
Lastly, thank you for letting me know what I have done unkindly. That will help me better on the rest. I really appreciate it.
Thank you so much, AlpheccaStars!
Have a nice day and best wish for you.

Yours sincerely,
An

Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
An Vo LeI am really grateful for your helps.

Thank you for your message.

By the way, "help" is never plural. It is mostly a non-count noun.


It is used as a count noun rarely in situations like this:

Nguyen just helped old Mrs. Hong carry her groceries home from the market. She says, "Thank you. That was a big help. "

More and more people are arguing argue ("more and more" implies a durative situation. The better fit is the continuous tense.) that animals should be protected from human exploitation and we should grant rights for to them which is (wrong form) similar to human rights. While others believe that animals are only essential parts providing resources for daily meals and research to improve enhance people’s lives. Personally, I can understand the opposing points of views people should employ it or not. ( That is very ambiguous as well as ungrammatical. What is your opinion? You are missing a clear thesis statement.)

On the one hand, we can see that animals do not feel pain in the same way as humans. Their nervous systems are less developed. Therefore, animals should be sacrificed to do some good for human (wrong form) such as food and research serving. (wrong expression) For instance, to test potentially life-saving medicine. (wrong form. Also this is a fragment, not a sentence) The pain we inflict on an animal through animal testing, (wrong punctuation. Never put a single comma between subject and verb..) is far less devastating to a life than the pain we seek to cure in a human being’s life. In addition, animals do not share in the network of duties and responsibilities that give people right. (wrong form) For that reason, in order to get rights, it requires contribution (wrong form) to society in the form of taxes, voting and so on. (Do not use "etc.," ellipses and phrases such as "and so on" in formal essays. It is bad style.) Animal (wrong form) do none of that. Therefore, it is fairly inappropriate to grant animals rights in the same way as we grant rights to humans (wrong punctuation)

On the other hand, some people argue that we should treat animals like as humans and there are increasing numbers of people disproving to exploit (wrong form) animals. If so, (wrong transition expression. What does the increasing numbers of disapprovals have to do with nutrition?) ) people can not provide to their body enough essential nutrition for diversity (wrong form) daily activities, (comma splice error) we will get sick easier. Moreover, without medicine testing on animal, (wrong form) people will not discover treatment (wrong form) or increase the likelihood of human errors (wrong expression.. Errors do not cure diseases.) to cure diseases for patients. Therefore, It leads to people have to suffer (wrong form) more diseases.

Inconclusion, using animal (wrong form) for the right purpose to make (wrong form) our lives better is more favorable than prohibiting (missing object) , (comma splice error) however, we have to protect animals from cruelty and unnecessary pain.

AlpheccaStars

Personally, I can understand the opposing points of views people should employ it or not. ( That is very ambiguous as well as ungrammatical. What is your opinion? You are missing a clear thesis statement.) << I was trying to give my open opinion here, then in the main I gave my clear opinion, but I chose to write a clear opinion in my edited version below>>

On the other hand, some people argue that we should treat animals like as humans and there are increasing numbers of people disproving to exploit (wrong form) animals. If so, (wrong transition expression. What does the increasing numbers of disapprovals have to do with nutrition?) ) << I mean if we treat animal like humans we can not kill any animal with any purpose, it leads to a lack of animal meats provided for humans as currently >> people can not provide to their body enough essential nutrition for diversity (wrong form) daily activities.


Here is my edited version of the essay. Please help me check it one more time.
Thanks you again for continuing helping me. That is a big help.

----------------------------------------------

More and more people are arguing that animals should be protected from human exploitation and we should grant rights to them which are similar to human rights. While others believe that animals are only resources for daily meals and research to improve people’s lives. Personally, I can understand the opposing points of views; I believe that using animals for the good purposes brings more advantages than preventing it.
On the one hand, we can see that animals do not feel pain in the same way as humans. Their nervous systems are less developed. Therefore, animals should be sacrificed to do some good for humans such as in research. For instance, to test potentially life-saving medicines, the pain we inflict on an animal through animal testing is far less devastating to a life than the pain we seek to cure in a human being’s life. In addition, animals do not share in the network of duties and responsibilities that give people rights. For that reason, in order to get rights, it requires contributions to society in the form of taxes, voting. Animals do none of that. Therefore, it is fairly inappropriate to grant animals rights in the same way as humans.
On the other hand, some people argue that we should treat animals like humans. It means we can not kill any animal with any purpose. we won't have meats, such as beef, pork and fish, supply many nutrition which help the body release energy, server in the function of the nervous system. They are essential for daily activities, humans will get sick easier if lacking it. Moreover, without medicine testing on animals, people will not discover treatments to cure diseases for patients. Therefore, people will suffer more diseases.
Inconclusion, using animals for the purpose making our lives better is more favorable than prohibiting their exploitation and giving them the same rights as humans. However, we have to protect animals from cruelty and unnecessary pain.

Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
An Vo LePlease help me check it one more time.

That is not a good request. It means that you will check the essay with our assistance. This web site does not provide for more than one person checking at a time. Maybe you need to recommend a chat application for this.


More and more people are arguing that animals should be protected from human exploitation and we should grant rights to them which are similar to human rights. While others believe that animals are only resources for daily meals and research to improve people’s lives. (Fragment, dependent clause) Personally, I can understand the opposing points of views; I believe that using animals for the good purposes brings more advantages than harm. preventing it.
On the one hand, we can see that animals do not feel pain in the same way as humans. Their nervous systems are less developed. Therefore, animals should be sacrificed (That is a religious term. ) to do some good for humans such as in research. For instance, to test potentially life-saving medicines, the pain we inflict on an animal through animal testing is far less devastating to a life than the pain we seek to relieve cure in a human being’s life. In addition, animals do not share in the network of duties and responsibilities that give people rights. For that reason, in order to get rights, it requires contributions to society in the form of taxes, voting. (ungrammatical) Animals do none of that. Therefore, it is fairly inappropriate to grant animals rights in the same way as humans.
On the other hand, some people argue that we should treat animals like humans. It means we can not kill any animal for with any purpose. we won't have meats, such as beef, pork and fish, supply many nutrition which help the body release energy, server in the function of the nervous system. (Awkward, incorrect usage, wrong words) They are essential for daily activities, (comma splice error! http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/commasplice.htm ) humans will get sick easier if lacking it. Moreover, without medicine testing on animals, people will not discover treatments to cure diseases for patients. Therefore, people will suffer more diseases.
Inconclusion, using animals for the purpose making our lives better is more favorable than prohibiting their exploitation and giving them the same rights as humans. However, we have to protect animals from cruelty and unnecessary pain.

AlpheccaStars
An Vo LePlease help me check it one more time.

That is not a good request. It means that you will check the essay with our assistance. This web site does not provide for more than one person checking at a time. Maybe you need to recommend a chat application for this.

I just mean help me review my edited essay.
I can correct the rest, thank you AlpheccaStars.

An Vo LeI just mean help me review my edited essay.

That is incorrect.


Help mother cook dinner. = Mother cooks dinner and you help her.
Help me review my essay. = You review the essay and I assist you.


Compare with these requests:

Please cook dinner. = You cook the dinner.
Please review my essay. = I review the essay for you.


And these:

Mother is sick. Please help her by cooking dinner. = Mother says in bed and you do the cooking for tonight.
Please help me by reviewing my essay. = I review your essay. It is a big help for you.

Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Show more