Summary and critique of “Animal research saves human lives”
In her article “Animal research saves human lives,” Heloisa Sabin asserts that animal research is important and should be ongoing, because it can eliminate pain, suffering, and disease from our lives. She points out that animals were needed to create a vaccine to treat the polio disease. She argues that if animal research was not done, the polio disease would continue spreading and harming thousands lives of people every day. She indicates that one of the reasons that are responsible in part of the increase of the polio cases in the 50’s was the sanitation practices, however when these sanitation practices have improved, the rate of infection have reduced. Moreover, she argues that …show more content…
In the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph, she says that: “In the United Sates, polio struck down nearly 58,000 children in 1952 alone” (para.3). Here, she didn’t provide any source or reference for this statistical information, which can weaken her acknowledgment, credibility, and support of the argument. Also, such lack of evidence and resource as well as her approach of stating opinions versus facts can be seen in another argument where she claims that: “advanced sanitation was responsible in part for the dramatic rise in the number of paralytic polio cases in the fifties. Improvements in sanitation practices reduced the rate of infection, and the average age of those infected by the polio virus went up” (para.7). In this example, it is apparent that this is her opinion because there is no clear evidence or reference to the source of information, which also weakens her overall argument. On the other hand, Sabin’s article also includes few proper citations and evidences such as the instance when she refers to what the world health organization reports about the time in which polio could be eliminated from the world (para.5). In addition to that, she uses some excerpts from her husband as a supporting evidence from the field to improve her position on animal
In her article “Animal research saves human lives,” Heloisa Sabin asserts that animal research is important and should be ongoing, because it can eliminate pain, suffering, and disease from our lives. She points out that animals were needed to create a vaccine to treat the polio disease. She argues that if animal research was not done, the polio disease would continue spreading and harming thousands lives of people every day. She indicates that one of the reasons that are responsible in part of the increase of the polio cases in the 50’s was the sanitation practices, however when these sanitation practices have improved, the rate of infection have reduced. Moreover, she argues that …show more content…
In the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph, she says that: “In the United Sates, polio struck down nearly 58,000 children in 1952 alone” (para.3). Here, she didn’t provide any source or reference for this statistical information, which can weaken her acknowledgment, credibility, and support of the argument. Also, such lack of evidence and resource as well as her approach of stating opinions versus facts can be seen in another argument where she claims that: “advanced sanitation was responsible in part for the dramatic rise in the number of paralytic polio cases in the fifties. Improvements in sanitation practices reduced the rate of infection, and the average age of those infected by the polio virus went up” (para.7). In this example, it is apparent that this is her opinion because there is no clear evidence or reference to the source of information, which also weakens her overall argument. On the other hand, Sabin’s article also includes few proper citations and evidences such as the instance when she refers to what the world health organization reports about the time in which polio could be eliminated from the world (para.5). In addition to that, she uses some excerpts from her husband as a supporting evidence from the field to improve her position on animal