▶ Your Answer :
According to the reading part, the writer argues agrees that the research based on animals (experiments on animals를 말하는건가요?) should be continued. On the other hand, the speaker disagrees with the idea the writer says, being against for a professor. ß이렇게 반복적으로 쓰실 필요 없습니다.
The author, who wrote the passage, thinks that to do animal testing/ implement research on animals is inevitable. First of all, there is no replacement as good as animals to invent medicines for human. For example, the genes of chimpanzees are almost same as with those of humans us. Second, the results from that kind of research are very helpful to expect the one (?) when it comes to human. There are many instances to prove it(,) such as research done by Louis Pasteur, a French scientist. there are many instances 라고 했는데 한가지만 제시하시는 것보다는 여러가지를 제시해주시는 것이 더 좋을 것 같네요. For these reasons, the writer argues/claims agrees that it is still inevitable and vital experiment for medicine.
However, the speaker in the lecture disagrees with the idea in the passage. As a person who has studied biology, she says that there are a lot of replacements instead of animals, like using a tissue and a computer graphic. In addition to it, she insists that animals are in a harsh environment under the name of the experiment. Finally, she mentioned that there are many examples to be invented without animals, such as Aspirin.
Reading 따로 lecture 따로 정리하셨는데 3가지 동일한 point에 대해서 서로 다른 입장을 보이는 것이므로 각 point 별로 정리하시는 것을 추천해드립니다. 수고하셨습니다~ |