Prevent wild animals from dying out

Topic 5

Wild animals have no place in the 21^st century. Some people think that preventing these wild animals from dying out is a waste of resource. Agree or disagree?

Wild animals play an important role in humans’ lives. Some people think that by all means, we should try to protect them from extinction while others claim that it is unnecessary since they are just animals and hardly contribute to social development. I strongly disagree with the latter view for the following reasons. 

First, it is believed that animals can hardly contribute to solving real problems in the world. While there are many people dying due to poverty, it would be a waste of money and effort to protect soulless animals. Nevertheless, animals are crucial to the survival of human beings. Were it not for the presence of these beings, humans would never have a balanced ecology to live in the long term. The absence of endangered species has led to the increasing number of natural disasters that push people into poverty and homelessness. In addition, animals are just like humans, since they can feel and share feelings with us. Some of them even sacrifice their lives to rescue their owners like the case of admirable dogs which are sculptured into statues. 

Second, the argument is that several animals are harmful to our planet. Mosquitoes and flies can cause diseases to humans due to their spread of dangerous virus. However, these animals can contributors to the sustenance of food chain in both animals and humans themselves. The spread of virus is mainly on account of humans’ inability to ensure good sanitation, not animals. Moreover, in certain cultures, no sooner are animals like sheeps and pigs killed than this action is regarded as immoral and inhumane as a result of the fact that they are seen as saints. Scientifically speaking, researchers use animals as useful objects to study human beings and find a cure for our diseases. Experiments on rats to remedy cancer are telling examples.

In brief, animals have a variety of benefits in our world, and let’s save, love and them as part of our life before it is too late. 

-         Sculpture into statues : điêu khắc thành tượng

Testing new products on animals

Topic 3

As public safety is one of the highest importances, it is often necessary to test new products on animals. It is better for a few animals to suffer than for human life to be placed at risk by untested products. Agree or disagree?

The action of killing animals remains controversial. Some people think that this decision is beneficial for the security of human beings while others claim that it can endanger environment in the long term. I strongly disagree with this inhumane action for the following reasons.

It is, first, believed that animal testing ensures safety for human lives. No sooner do consumers know that products are well tested on hundreds of animals than they may feel less scared and ready to use them. Nevertheless, who can make sure that these products really work in humans, despite their effectiveness in animals? Even though some studies have indicated that the bodies and brain structure of certain animals like mice are similar to those of humans, until now there has had no empirical research to show that animal’s testing products are 100% effective and safe in humans.

Secondly, it is argued that animals’testing in much cheaper than that of humans. To ask for humans to take part in research demands a huge budget from money paid for participation, health insurance and other related services. Yet, the price of killing animals is far more expensive. Were it not for the existence of animals, environment would be put in danger. Let’s remember the disappearance of dinosaurs which put the entire world in danger for a long time. Animals play a crucial role in balancing ecology, undeniably. In addition, to some cultures, animals are seen as saints, which means that the action of kiling them for any purpose is a sacrilege. Like human beings, animals have the right to live and love.

In brief, I am strongly convinced by the idea of not taking lives of animals for purpose of testing because it is inhumane, unsafe and adversely affects environment.

-          Sacrilege (n) tội báng bổ thần thánh

-         Empirical research : nghiên cứu thực nghiệm

-         Scare (n) (v) sợ hãi

Necessary to use animals for food, clothing or medicine ??

ĐỀ 28/4/2012

 “In the world today, it is no longer necessary to use animals for food, and their products for clothing or medicine. To what extend do you agree or disagree"

For

- Animals are our great friends

- Animals protect us

- Technology develops and creates great output

- Animals are seen as sacred in some religions

- Animals are ecology-balancers

Animals are part of our lives, undeniably, but how important animals are in our lives remains controversial. To some, killing animals for food is tantamount to killing somebody while others view this as acceptable despite their acknowledgement of their essential role in our lives. My view is that under no circumstance do animals become our preys.

Admittedly, it is commonly seen that animals are used for our daily food and source of energy. The natural rule is believed that all species depend on each other for existence, and it makes sense for human to do so. Nevertheless, looking back on historical stories of animals, humans can hardly ignore the great sacrifices of these species. There have been dogs risking their lives in the protection of their masters and being commemorated as true heroes while pets are great companions of the old and little children. Such emotional attachment is so deep that our seeing them dye for mundane purpose of meat-eating is unbearable.

Another point in the favor of culling animals is for human’s medical benefit. It is proved that some animals which resemble human’s physical structure become useful objects for scientists to research and come up with radical cures for dangerous diseases. Nevertheless, the question is that whether these studies truly have effects when their long-term benefits are not yet well-examined, and sometimes, the inherent differences in biology between animals and human may even cause genetic defects. Besides, in some religions, as animals are viewed as sacred as saints, it would go against their established belief if the world allows these species to be daily consumed. Sometimes, because of this, conflicts may happen unexpectedly among people of different sets of value. In times of cutting-edge technology, why don’t we come up with other alternatives to heighten their food output through mass-produced plantation? And imagine what would occur to the world one day if animals were in danger of extinction owing to humans’ greed? There is a greater price to pay, actually.

All things considered, I strongly believe that humans should refrain themselves from exploiting animals for both daily consumption and scientific objects.

-         Sacred /’seikrid/ (adj) linh thiêng, thiêng liêng, được tôn sùng

-         Religion (n) : tôn giáo, đạo, sự tín ngưỡng, sự sùng bái

-         Tantamount /'tæntəmaunt/ (adj) tương đương, ngang với  = equivalent (adj)

-         Prey /prei/ (n) mồi, nạn nhân

-         Natural rule /ru:l/ (n) quy luật tự nhiên

-         Unbearable (adj) không thể chịu đựng được, không thể tha thứ được

-         Attachment + to/for sb/sth  (n) sự gắn bó, trung thành

-         Commemorate (v) kỉ niệm, tưởng niệm

-         Companion (n) : bạn, bầu bạn    (v) companion + with : làm bạn với

-         Cull (v) : lựa chọn, chọn lọc  = opt (v)

-         Favour (n) sự thiên vị, ủng hộ, thiện ý, sự quý mến

-         Resemble /ri’zembl/ (v) giống với, tương tự như = similar (adj)

-     Radical /'rædikəl/ (adj) gốc, rễ, căn bản - radical cures (n) phương pháp chữa bệnh tận gốc

-         Inherent (adj) vốn có, cố hữu

-         Defect (n) nhược điểm, khuyết điểm, lỗi

-         Exploit (v) khai thác, bóc lột, lợi dụng

-         Refrain + from (v) kìm chế , cố nhịn