opinion essay animal experiments

• IELTS Scores
• Life Skills Test
• Find a Test Centre
• Alternatives to IELTS
• General Training
• Academic Word List
• Topic Vocabulary
• Collocation
• Phrasal Verbs
• Writing eBooks
• Reading eBook
• All eBooks & Courses
• Sample Essays

Animal Testing Essay

Ielts animal testing essay.

Here you will find an example of an IELTS  animal testing essay .

In this essay, you are asked to discuss the arguments  for  and  against  animal testing, and then give  your own conclusions  on the issue.

This means you must look at both sides of the issue and you must also be sure you give your opinion too.

The essay is similar to an essay that says " Discuss both opinions and then give your opinion " but it is worded differently.

Take a look at the question and model answer below, and think about how the essay has been organised and how it achieves coherence and cohesion.

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.

Write about the following topic:

Examine the arguments in favour of and against animal experiments, and come to a conclusion on this issue.

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own experience or knowledge.

Write at least 250 words.

Animals Testing Essay - Model Answer

Issues related to animal experimentation are frequently discussed these days, particularly in the media. It is often said that animals should not be used in testing because it is cruel and unnecessary. This essay will examine the arguments for and against animal testing. 

On the one hand, the people who support these experiments say that we must do tests on animals. For instance, many famous lifesaving drugs were invented in this way, and animal experiments may help us to find more cures in the future. Indeed, possibly even a cure for cancer and AIDS. Furthermore, the animals which are used are not usually wild but are bred especially for experiments. Therefore, they believe it is not true that animal experiments are responsible for reducing the number of wild animals on the planet. 

On the other hand, others feel that there are good arguments against this. First and foremost, animal experiments are unkind and cause animals a lot of pain. In addition, they feel that many tests are not really important, and in fact animals are not only used to test new medicines but also new cosmetics, which could be tested on humans instead. Another issue is that sometimes an experiment on animals gives us the wrong result because animals’ bodies are not exactly the same as our own. As a consequence, this testing may not be providing the safety that its proponents claim.

In conclusion, I am of the opinion, on balance, that the benefits do not outweigh the disadvantages, and testing on animals should not continue. Although it may improve the lives of humans, it is not fair that animals should suffer in order to achieve this.

(Words 278)

This animal testing essay would achieve a high score.

It fully answers all parts of the task - explaining the arguments ' for ' in the first paragraph and the arguments ' against ' in the next. Conclusions are then drawn with the writer giving their opinion in the conclusion.

It is thus very clearly organised, with each body paragraph having a central idea .

Ideas are also extended and supported by the use of reasons and some examples or further clarification. No ideas are left unclear or unexplained.

There is also some good topic related vocabulary in the animal testing essay such as 'life saving drugs ' and 'bred ' and a mix of complex sentences , such as adverbial clauses :

'Although it may improve the lives of humans, it is not fair that animals should suffer in order to achieve this'.

Noun clauses :

'...they feel that many tests are not really important'.

And relative clauses :

'...the animals which are used are not usually wild... '

Transitions are also used effectively to ensure there is good coherence and cohesion . For example, ' On the other hand.. ' indicates a change to discuss the contrasting ideas, and ' Therefore... " and ' As a consequence..' are used to give results.

<<< Back

Next >>>

More 'Hybrid' Type IELTS Essays:

Fear of Crime Essay: Can more be done to prevent crime?

In this fear of crime essay question for IELTS you have to discuss whether more can be down to prevent crime. It's an opinion type essay.

Communication Technology Essay: How have relationships changed?

Communication Technology Essay for IELTS: This essay is about how relationships have been impacted. View a model answer with tips on how to answer the Task 2 Question.

Old Buildings Essay: How important is it to maintain & protect them?

This essay is about old buildings and whether they should be protected. It's an opinion essay, as you have to give your opinion on protecting old buildings.

IELTS Essay: What influence do children’s friends have on them?

In this influence of children's friends essay for IELTS you have to discuss the way children's friends may affect their behaviour and what parents can do to control this.

Any comments or questions about this page or about IELTS? Post them here. Your email will not be published or shared.

Band 7+ eBooks

"I think these eBooks are FANTASTIC!!! I know that's not academic language, but it's the truth!"

Linda, from Italy, Scored Band 7.5

Bargain eBook Deal! 30% Discount

All 4 Writing eBooks for just  $25.86 Find out more >>

IELTS Modules:

Other resources:.

• All Lessons
• Band Score Calculator
• Writing Feedback
• Speaking Feedback
• Teacher Resources
• Free Downloads
• Recent Essay Exam Questions
• Books for IELTS Prep
• Useful Links

Recent Articles

IELTS Line Graph: Governments Expenditure on Research

Jul 23, 24 01:27 PM

House History Essay

Jul 16, 24 04:06 PM

Paraphrasing Activity for IELTS Reading

Jul 13, 24 07:48 AM

Important pages

IELTS Writing IELTS Speaking IELTS Listening   IELTS Reading All Lessons Vocabulary Academic Task 1 Academic Task 2 Practice Tests

Connect with us

Before you go...

30% discount - just $25.86 for all 4 writing ebooks.

Copyright © 2022- IELTSbuddy All Rights Reserved

IELTS is a registered trademark of University of Cambridge, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia. This site and its owners are not affiliated, approved or endorsed by the University of Cambridge ESOL, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia.

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Animal Testing

Argumentative Essays on Animal Testing

Hook examples for animal testing essays, the ethical dilemma hook.

Begin your essay by presenting the ethical dilemma surrounding animal testing. Explore the moral questions it raises and the conflicting viewpoints of proponents and opponents.

The Historical Perspective Hook

Take your readers on a journey through the history of animal testing. Discuss its origins, evolution, and its role in scientific and medical advancements over time.

The Scientific Advancements Hook

Highlight the scientific breakthroughs and discoveries that have resulted from animal testing. Discuss how it has contributed to medical treatments, vaccines, and the understanding of diseases.

The Alternatives and Innovations Hook

Explore alternative methods and innovations in research that aim to replace or reduce the use of animals in testing. Discuss advancements like in vitro testing and computer modeling.

The Animal Welfare Hook

Focus on the welfare and ethical treatment of animals used in testing. Discuss regulations, guidelines, and efforts to minimize harm and suffering in research.

The Legal and Regulatory Landscape Hook

Examine the legal and regulatory framework surrounding animal testing in different countries. Discuss laws, restrictions, and their enforcement.

The Public Opinion and Activism Hook

Discuss public perceptions of animal testing and the role of animal rights activists in advocating for change. Highlight notable campaigns and their impact.

The Unintended Consequences Hook

Explore unintended consequences or risks associated with animal testing, such as potential harm to humans due to species differences or the limitations of animal models.

The Future of Research Hook

Discuss the future of scientific research and the possibilities for reducing or eliminating animal testing. Explore emerging technologies and trends in biomedical research.

The Personal Story Hook

Share a personal or anecdotal story related to animal testing, such as the experiences of a researcher, activist, or someone affected by medical advancements achieved through animal testing.

Is Animal Experimentation Justified?

Animal rights arguments example, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Persuasive Speech on Animal Abuse

Arguments aganist using animals in experiments and testing, reasons to stop animal testing, the reasons why animal testing should be stopped, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Discussion Whether Animals Testing is Necessary

An argument favoring the use of animals in testing and the benefits it has brought, animal testing in modern world, pros and cons of animal testing: the conflicting debate, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

The Ethics of Animal Testing: an Argument Against Its Practice

Discussion: should animals be used for scientific research, the arguments concerning animal testing, why animal testing should be viewed as beneficial, saving the animals: alternative ways to test products, discussion on whether scientists should be allowed to test products on animals, the arguments why we should not test on animals, reasons why animal testing should be forbidden, why we should not continue test on animals, arguments for the reduction of animal testing, the problem of human cruelty to animals, how animal testing benefits us from diseases, stop the cruel and unnecessary animal testing, animal testing and alternatives for developing cruelty-free makeup, animals should not be a part of scientific research, worldwide problem of animal testing, analysis of the perspectives in support for animal testing and against it, animal testing in the united states, animal testing in the world, arguments for eliminating the use of animal testing.

Animal testing, referred to as animal experimentation, animal research, or in vivo testing, involves the utilization of animals other than humans in scientific experiments aimed at manipulating the factors influencing the behavior or biological processes being investigated.

Throughout history, the practice of animal testing has deep roots dating back centuries. The earliest recorded instances can be traced back to ancient civilizations, where animals were used for various scientific and medical purposes. The Greek physician Galen, during the second century AD, conducted experiments on animals to understand human anatomy and physiology. However, the formal establishment of animal testing as a systematic approach began to take shape during the 19th century with the emergence of modern medical research. In the late 1800s, advances in scientific knowledge and technology led to an increased demand for animal testing in various fields, including medicine, toxicology, and physiology. The development of anesthesia further facilitated the experimentation on animals by reducing pain and discomfort. Throughout the 20th century, animal testing became more widespread and institutionalized, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry.

Public opinion on animal testing is a complex and diverse topic, with viewpoints spanning a wide spectrum. While there are those who support the use of animals in scientific research for the advancement of human knowledge and medical breakthroughs, others express strong opposition due to ethical concerns and the perceived mistreatment of animals. Some people argue that animal testing is necessary for the development of life-saving treatments and the improvement of human health. They believe that animals provide valuable insights into human biology and the effectiveness of potential therapies. On the other hand, opponents of animal testing argue that it is cruel and unnecessary, advocating for alternative methods such as in vitro testing, computer modeling, and human cell-based assays. Public opinion on animal testing often hinges on the balance between scientific progress and animal welfare. The growing awareness of animal rights and ethical considerations has fueled debates and discussions surrounding the topic. As society becomes more conscious of animal welfare, there is an increasing demand for alternative testing methods and greater transparency in the treatment of animals involved in research. Ultimately, public opinion plays a crucial role in shaping policies and regulations surrounding animal testing.

1. Scientific advancement. 2. Human health and safety. 3. Understanding diseases. 4. Regulatory requirements. 5. Animal welfare improvements.

1. Ethical concerns. 2. Inadequate human relevance. 3. Availability of alternatives. 4. Animal welfare. 5. Speciesism and moral status.

One example of media representation is the documentary "Earthlings" directed by Shaun Monson. This influential film explores different aspects of animal exploitation, including animal testing, and highlights the ethical concerns surrounding the practice. It has garnered widespread attention and prompted discussions about the treatment of animals in scientific research. Social media platforms have also become powerful tools for activists and organizations to share information and advocate for alternatives to animal testing. Hashtags like #StopAnimalTesting and #CrueltyFree have gained traction, raising awareness and encouraging conversations on the topic.

The topic of animal testing is important due to its ethical, scientific, and societal implications. From an ethical standpoint, it raises profound questions about the treatment of sentient beings and the moral responsibility we have towards animals. It prompts us to consider the balance between scientific progress and animal welfare, urging us to explore alternative methods that minimize harm. Scientifically, animal testing has been instrumental in advancing medical knowledge and developing treatments for various diseases. However, it is essential to continually evaluate its effectiveness, limitations, and potential alternatives to ensure both human and animal well-being. Furthermore, the issue of animal testing has societal implications as it reflects our values and priorities as a society. It prompts discussions about our relationship with animals, the extent of their rights, and the importance of promoting more humane practices.

The topic of animal testing is worth writing an essay about due to its complex nature and the multitude of perspectives it encompasses. It is a subject that elicits strong emotions and raises critical ethical, scientific, and social questions. Writing an essay on animal testing allows for an in-depth exploration of these issues and encourages critical thinking and analysis. By delving into the topic, one can examine the ethical considerations surrounding the use of animals in experiments, weighing the potential benefits against the moral implications. Additionally, it provides an opportunity to evaluate the scientific validity and reliability of animal testing as a method for understanding human biology and developing medical treatments. Furthermore, an essay on animal testing opens avenues for discussing alternative approaches and advancements in technology that can reduce or replace animal experimentation. It allows for an exploration of the societal impact of animal testing, including public opinion, legislation, and the influence of media.

1. Each year, millions of animals are used in scientific experiments worldwide. According to estimates, over 100 million animals, including rabbits, mice, rats, dogs, and primates, are subjected to testing for various purposes, such as biomedical research, drug development, and toxicity testing. 2. Animal testing is not always reliable in predicting human outcomes. Studies have shown that there can be significant differences between animals and humans in terms of anatomy, physiology, and drug metabolism. This raises concerns about the validity and relevance of using animal models for understanding human diseases and developing treatments. 3. Alternatives to animal testing are emerging and gaining traction. Scientists and researchers are actively exploring innovative methods, such as in vitro cell cultures, computer modeling, and organ-on-a-chip technology, to simulate human biology and predict human responses more accurately. These alternative approaches aim to reduce or eliminate the need for animal testing while still ensuring the safety and efficacy of new products and treatments.

1. Abbott, A. (2005). Animal testing: more than a cosmetic change. Nature, 438(7065), 144-147. (https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA185466349&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00280836&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=anon%7E513ffe31) 2. Doke, S. K., & Dhawale, S. C. (2015). Alternatives to animal testing: A review. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1319016413001096 Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal, 23(3), 223-229. 3. Hajar, R. (2011). Animal testing and medicine. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3123518/ Heart views: the official journal of the Gulf Heart Association, 12(1), 42. 4. Bottini, A. A., & Hartung, T. (2009). Food for thought… on the economics of animal testing. ALTEX-Alternatives to animal experimentation, 26(1), 3-16. (https://www.altex.org/index.php/altex/article/view/633) 5. Valappil, S. P., Misra, S. K., Boccaccini, A. R., & Roy, I. (2006). Biomedical applications of polyhydroxyalkanoates, an overview of animal testing and in vivo responses. Expert Review of Medical Devices, 3(6), 853-868. (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1586/17434440.3.6.853) 6. File, S. E., Lippa, A. S., Beer, B., & Lippa, M. T. (2004). Animal tests of anxiety. Current protocols in neuroscience, 26(1), 8-3. (https://currentprotocols.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/0471142301.ns0803s26) 7. Madden, J. C., Enoch, S. J., Paini, A., & Cronin, M. T. (2020). A review of in silico tools as alternatives to animal testing: principles, resources and applications. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 48(4), 146-172. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0261192920965977) 8. Donnellan, L. (2006). Animal testing in cosmetics: recent developments in the European Union and the United States. Animal L., 13, 251. (https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/anim13&div=18&id=&page=)

Relevant topics

• Gun Violence
• Gun Control
• Pro Choice (Abortion)
• Human Trafficking
• Homelessness
• Death Penalty
• Gender Equality
• Illegal Immigration
• Discrimination

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Looking for interesting animal testing topics to research and write about? This field is truly controversial and worth studying!

• 🌶️ Titles: Catchy & Creative
• 🐶 Essay: How to Write
• 🏆 Best Essay Examples
• 📌 Good Topics to Research
• 🎯 Most Interesting Topics to Write about

❓ Animal Testing Research Questions

In your animal testing essay, you might want to explore the historical or legal perspective, focus on the issue of animal rights, or discuss the advantages or disadvantages of animal testing in medicine, pharmacology, or cosmetic industry. We’ve gathered the most creative and catchy animal testing titles and added top animal testing essay examples. There are also useful tips on making and outline, formulating a thesis, and creating a hook sentence for your animal testing essay.

🌶️ Animal Testing Titles: Catchy & Creative

• What would life be like without animal testing?
• Animal testing: the cruelest experiments.
• AWA: why does not it protect all animals?
• What if animals experimented on humans?
• In the skin of a guinea pig: a narrative essay.
• Opposing animal testing: success stories.
• Animal-tested products: should they be destroyed?
• What have we gained from experiments on animals?
• Animal testing and cancer research: past and present.

🐶 Animal Testing Essay: How to Write

Animal testing has been an acute problem for a long time. Scientists and pharmaceutical firms use this approach to test cosmetics, foods, and other products people use daily.

Essays on animal testing are important because they highlight the significance of the problem. Writing outstanding animal testing essays requires extensive research and dedication.

We have prepared some do’s and don’ts for your excellent essay. But first, you should select a topic for your paper. Here are the examples of animal testing essay topics you can choose from:

• The question of animal intelligence from the perspective of animal testing
• Animal testing should (not) be banned
• How animal testing affects endangered species
• The history and consequences of animal testing
• The controversy associated with animal testing
• Animal Bill of Rights: Pros and cons
• Is animal testing necessary?

Remember that these animal testing essay titles are just the ideas for your paper. You are free to select other relevant titles and topics for discussion, too. Once you have selected the problem for your essay, you can start working on the paper. Here are some do’s of writing about animal testing:

• Do extensive preliminary research on the issue you have selected. You should be aware of all the problems associated with your questions, its causes, and consequences. Ask your professor about the sources you can use. Avoid relying on Wikipedia and personal blogs as your primary sources of information.
• Develop a well-organized outline and think of how you will structure your paper. Think of the main animal testing essay points and decide how you can present them in the paper. Remember to include introductory and concluding sections along with several body paragraphs.
• Start your paper with a hooking sentence. An animal testing essay hook should grab the reader’s attention. You can present an interesting question or statistics in this sentence.
• Include a well-defined thesis statement at the end of the introductory section.
• Your reader should understand the issue you are discussing. Explain what animal testing is, provide arguments for your position, and support them with evidence from your research.
• Discuss alternative perspectives on the issue if you are working on a persuasive essay. At the same time, you need to show that your opinion is more reliable than the opposing ones.
• Remember that your paper should not be offensive. Even if you criticize animal testing, stick to the formal language and provide evidence of why this practice is harmful.

There are some important points you should avoid while working on your paper. Here are some important don’ts to remember:

• Avoid making claims if you cannot reference them. Support your arguments with evidence from the literature or credible online sources even if you are writing an opinion piece. References will help the reader to understand that your viewpoint is reliable.
• Do not go over or below the word limit. Stick to your professor’s instructions.
• Avoid copying the essays you will find online. Your paper should be plagiarism-free.
• Avoid making crucial grammatical mistakes. Pay attention to the word choice and sentence structures. Check the paper several times before sending it for approval. If you are not sure whether your grammar is correct, ask a friend to look through the paper for you.

Do not forget to look at some of our free samples that will help you with your paper!

Animal Testing Hook Sentence

Your animal testing essay should start with a hook – an opening statement aiming to grab your reader’s attention. A good idea might be to use an impressive fact or statistics connected to experiments on animals:

• More than 100 million animals are killed in US laboratories each year.
• Animal Welfare Act (AWA) does not cover 99% animals used in experiments: according to it, rats, birds, reptiles, and fish are not animals.
• More than 50% adults in the US are against animal testing.

🏆 Best Animal Testing Essay Examples

• Should Animals Be Used in Medical Research? It is therefore possible to use animals while testing the dangers and the toxicity of new drugs and by so doing; it is possible to protect human beings from the dangers that can emanate from […]
• Animal Testing: Should Animal Testing Be Allowed? — Argumentative Essay It is crucial to agree that animal testing might be unethical phenomenon as argued by some groups; nonetheless, it should continue following its merits and contributions to the humankind in the realms of drug investigations […]
• Cosmetic Testing on Animals The surface of the skin or near the eyes of such animals is meant to simulate that of the average human and, as such, is one of easiest methods of determining whether are particular type […]
• Experimentation on Animals However, critics of experimenting with animals argue that animals are subjected to a lot of pain and suffering in the course of coming up with scientific breakthroughs which in the long run may prove futile.
• Animal Testing: History and Arguments Nevertheless, that law was more focused on the welfare of animals in laboratories rather than on the prohibition of animal testing.
• Animal Experiments and Inhuman Treatment Although the results of such a laboratory may bring answers to many questions in medicine, genetics, and other vital spheres, it is frequently a case that the treatment of such animals is inhumane and cruel. […]
• Animal Testing and Ethics I believe it is also difficult to develop efficient legislation on the matter as people have different views on animal research and the line between ethical and unethical is blurred in this area.
• The Debate on Animal Testing The purpose of this paper is to define animal testing within a historical context, establish ethical and legal issues surrounding the acts, discuss animal liberation movements, arguments in support and against the act of animal […]
• Animal Testing in Medicine and Industry Animal testing is the inescapable reality of medicine and industry. However, between human suffering and animal suffering, the former is more important.
• Preclinical Testing on Animals The authors argue that despite the recent decline in the level of quality and transparency of preclinical trials, the scientific communities should always rely on animal testing before moving to human subjects and the subsequent […]
• Using Animals in Medical Research and Experiments While discussing the use of animals in medical research according to the consequentialist perspective, it is important to state that humans’ preferences cannot be counted higher to cause animals’ suffering; humans and animals’ preferences need […]
• Laboratory Experiments on Animals: Argument Against In some cases, the animals are not given any painkillers because their application may alter the effect of the medication which is investigated.
• Animal Testing From Medical and Ethical Viewpoints Striving to discover and explain the peculiarities of body functioning, already ancient Greeks and Romans resorted to vivisecting pigs; the scientific revolution of the Enlightenment era witnessed animal testing becoming the leading trend and a […]
• Negative Impacts of Animal Testing To alter these inhumane laws, we should organize a social movement aiming at the reconsideration of the role of animals in research and improvement of their positions.
• Animal Testing: Long and Unpretty History Nevertheless, that law was more focused on the welfare of animals in laboratories rather than on the prohibition of animal testing.
• Animal Testing as an Unnecessary and Atrocious Practice Such acts of violence could be partially excused by the necessity to test medications that are developed to save human lives however, this kind of testing is even more inhumane as it is ineffective in […]
• Animal Testing and Environmental Protection While the proponents of animal use in research argued that the sacrifice of animals’ lives is crucial for advancing the sphere of medicine, the argument this essay will defend relates to the availability of modern […]
• Animal Testing for Scientific Research Despite the fact that the present-day science makes no secret of the use of animals for research purposes, not many people know what deprivation, pain, and misery those animals have to experience in laboratories.
• Animal Testing: History and Ethics Moreover, in the twelfth century, another Arabic physician, Avenzoar dissected animals and established animal testing experiment in testing surgical processes prior to their application to man. Trevan in 1927 to evaluate the effectiveness of digitalis […]
• Animal Testing Effects on Psychological Investigation In this context, ethical considerations remain a central theme in psychological research.”Ethics in research refers to the application of moral rules and professional codes of conduct to the collection, analysis, reporting, and publication of information […]
• Genetic Modification and Testing: Ethical Considerations It is done on a molecular level by synthesizing DNA, generating sequences and then inserting the received product into the organism which will be the carrier of the outcome. Another possibility is that the time […]
• Animal Testing: Why It Is Still Being Used The major reason for such “devotion” to animal testing can be explained by the fact that alternative sources of testing are insufficient and too inaccurate to replace conventional way of testing.
• Effects of Animal Testing and Alternatives Another challenge to the proponents of animal testing is related to dosage and the time line for a study. Animal rights values rebuff the notion that animals should have an importance to human beings in […]
• Ethics Problems in Animal Experimentation In spite of the fact that it is possible to find the arguments to support the idea of using animals in experiments, animal experimentation cannot be discussed as the ethical procedure because animals have the […]
• Animal Testing: Ethical Dilemmas in Business This means that both humans and animals have rights that need to be respected, and that is what brings about the many dilemmas that are experienced in this field.
• Should animals be used for scientific research? Therefore, considering the benefits that have been accrued from research activities due to use of animals in scientific research, I support that animals should be used in scientific research.
• Use of Animals in Research Testing: Ethical Justifications Involved The present paper argues that it is ethically justified to use animals in research settings if the goals of the research process are noble and oriented towards the advancement of human life.
• Ethical Problems in Animal Experimentation The banning of companies from testing on animals will force the manufacturers to use conventional methods to test their drugs and products.
• Utilitarianism for Animals: Testing and Experimentation There are alternatives in testing drugs such as tissue culture of human cells and hence this is bound to be more accurate in the findings.
• Use of Animals in Biological Testing Thus, these veterinarians have realized that the results that are realized from the animal research are very crucial in the improvement of the health of human being as well as that of animals.
• Medical Research on Animals Should be Forbidden by Law Vaccines and treatment regimes for various diseases that previously led to the death of humans were all discovered through research on animals.
• Psychoactive Drug Testing on Animals The alterations in behavioral traits of animals due to psychoactive drugs are primarily attributed to the changes in the brain functions or inhibition of certain brain components in animals which ultimately translates to changes in […]
• Negative Impacts of Animal Testing In many instances it can be proofed that drugs have been banned from the market after extensive research on animal testing and consuming a lot of cash, because of the dire effects that they cause […]

📌 Good Animal Testing Topics to Research

• Monkeys Don’t Like Wearing Makeup: Animal Testing In The Cosmetics Industry
• Animal Testing – Should Animal Experimentation Be Permitted
• Essay Animal Testing and In Vitro Testing as a Replacement
• Animal Testing : A Better Knowledge Of Human Body
• The Importance Of Animal Testing For Evaluating Consumer Safety
• The Issues on Animal Testing and the Alternative Procedures to Avoid the Use of the Inhuman Experimentation
• An Alternative to the Harsh and Unnecessary Practices of Animal Testing for Products, Drugs, Chemicals and Other Research
• The Unethical Use of Animals and the Need to Ban Animal Testing for Medical Research Purposes in the United States
• An Argument in Favor of Animal Testing for the Purpose of Clinical Research
• An Argument Against Animal Testing and the Banning of the Practice in the United States
• The Debate About the Ethics of Animal Testing and Its Effects on Us
• An Argument in Favor of Animal Testing as Beneficial to Human Health Research
• Animal Testing and the Reasons Why It Should Be Illegal
• The Principles of the Animal Testing From the Human Perspective
• The Ethical Issues on the Practice of Animal Testing to Test Cosmetics and Drugs
• Stopping Animal Testing and Vivisection by Passing a Bill against Animal Cruelty

🎯 Most Interesting Animal Testing Topics to Write about

• An Argument Against Animal Testing of Consumer Products and Drugs
• The Consequences and Unethical Practice of Animal Testing for Medical Training and Experiments
• How Do The Contributions Of Animal Testing To Global Medical
• Ways To Improve Animal Welfare After Premising The Animal Testing
• Animal Testing – Necessary or Barbaric and Wrong?
• Animal Testing And Its Impact On The Environment
• Animal Testing and Its Contribution to the Advancement of Medicine
• Cosmetics and Animal Testing: The Cause of Death and Mistreatment
• Animal Testing And People For The Ethical Treatment Of Animals
• Animal Rights Activists and the Controversial Issue of Animal Testing
• A History and the Types of Animal Testing in the Medical Area
• Argumentation on Medical Benefits of Animal Testing
• An Analysis of the Concept of Animal Testing Which Lowers the Standard of Human Life
• Is The Humane Society International Gave For Animal Testing
• A Discussion of Whether Animal Testing Is Good for Mankind or Violation of Rights
• The Ethics Of Animal Testing For Vaccine Development And Potential Alternatives
• The Good and Bad of Human Testing and Animal Testing
• What Should the Government Do About Animal Testing?
• Why Does Animal Testing Lower Our Standard of Living?
• Should Animals Be Used in Research?
• Why Should Animal Testing Be Accepted in the World?
• How Does Technology Impact Animal Testing?
• Why Should Animal Testing Be Illegal?
• Should Animal Testing Remain Legal?
• Why Should Animal Testing Be Banned?
• Can the Animal Testing Done to Find Cures for Diseases Be Humane?
• Does Animal Testing Really Work?
• Why Can’t Alternatives Like Computers Replace Research Animals?
• Should Animal Testing Continue to Test Cures for Human Diseases?
• How Does Animal Testing Effect Medicine?
• Should Animal Testing Continue or Be Stopped?
• What Are Advantages and Disadvantages of Animal Testing?
• Why Can Animal Testing Save Our Lives?
• Is Stem Cell Research Beginning of the End of Animal Testing?
• Do Beauty Products Suffer From Negative Publicity if They Conduct Trials on Animals?
• Should Medicine Trials Be Conducted?
• Can Results of Animal Testing Be Generalized to Adults?
• What Are the Origin and History of Animal Testing?
• Why Are Animals Needed to Screen Consumer Products for Safety When Products Tested by Alternative Methods, Are Available?
• How Much Does an Animal Suffer Due to Testing?
• What Is the Effectiveness of Animal Rights Groups in Stopping Animal Testing?
• How Do We Learn From Biomedical Research Using Animals?
• Who Cares for Animals in Research?
• How Do Laboratory Animal Science Professionals Feel About Their Work?
• Why Are There Increasing Numbers of Mice, Rats, and Fish Used in Research?
• How Can We Be Sure Lost or Stolen Pets Are Not Used in Research?
• Why Do Clinical Trials in Humans Require Prior Animal Testing?
• Vegetarianism Essay Ideas
• Animal Welfare Ideas
• Bioethics Titles
• Wildlife Ideas
• Extinction Research Topics
• Hunting Questions
• Genetic Engineering Topics
• Zoo Research Ideas
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, November 9). 105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/

"105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 9 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 9 November.

IvyPanda . 2023. "105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "105 Animal Testing Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/animal-testing-essay-examples/.

• A Beginner’s Guide to IELTS
• Common Grammar Mistakes [for IELTS Writing Candidates]

Writing Correction Service

• Free IELTS Resources
• Practice Speaking Test

Select Page

Animal Testing Essay

Posted by David S. Wills | Oct 21, 2022 | Model Essays | 0

There is a wide range of topics used in the IELTS writing test and many of them overlap. Today, we are going to look at a question that falls between the topics of animals and ethics and science. It will require you to write an animal testing essay .

In this article, I will analyse the question for you, give you some pointers on useful language, and then show you my own sample band 9 answer.

The Task: Animal Testing

Here is a question that appeared in the IELTS exam several years ago:

Some people claim that it is acceptable to use animals in medical research for the benefit of human beings, while other people argue that it is wrong. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

(Note that questions can be re-used or re-written, so it is possible that you might see this recycled in the future.)

This is a “discuss both views” question , so your task is ultimately to do three things:

• Explain why some people think animal testing is acceptable
• Explain why some people think animal testing is unacceptable
• Give your opinion

Even if you feel really strongly that it is wrong, for example, you still need to explain the opposing view. You don’t need to give a balanced answer , but you do need to acknowledge both sides of the debate. This is important for Task Response.

Planning your Answer

I almost always write a four-paragraph essay for my sample band 9 answers but today I’m going to write five. It could easily have been four paragraphs but I wanted to separate my anti-animal testing arguments into two separate paragraphs for better organisation. (You can read about 4- vs 5-paragraph essay structures here .)

My essay is going to look like this:

When it comes to a task 2 introduction , please make sure that you have a clear outline sentence and also that your opinion (if one is required) is stated clearly.

Body paragraph 1 will act as a sort of concession paragraph , so it will be imperative that I make it clear that this is not my opinion but rather what some other people think. If I fail to do this, then the reader might be confused.

The ideas in body paragraphs 2 and 3 will be separated but could also have been condensed into two paragraphs. However, I felt that for this topic it was a little more effective to split them. It also made my argument slightly more persuasive.

For the conclusion , I will be careful not to repeat myself too much and instead just summarise and reaffirm my stance.

Language for an Animal Testing Essay

The topic of animal testing is obviously controversial and so people will have different ideas. What you say will be largely based upon your own opinions. However, keep in mind that it covers those three topics I mentioned:

You don’t really need to know a lot about each, but it definitely would have some benefit if you knew a little about these areas and had some good vocabulary to use. I wrote about the IELTS topic of animals here , and there is plenty of good vocabulary that you can borrow. You can also search “animals” in the search bar at the top of the page.

I also recommend that you read and listen on issues that are related to IELTS topics like this. I particularly recommend the SYSK podcast episode on animal testing, which I think it is informative and accessible. You may learn some good language and get some inspiration for what you could write in your own animal testing essay. Other sources include this argument against animal testing by PETA and this one in favour of it by Stanford.

Language for Contentious Issues

In my essay, I will use the following phrases, which could be modified and applied to other contentious issues. I will put the specific language in brackets, so that you could swap it out when discussing other topics:

• [animal testing] has been fiercely debated due to the ethical problems inherent in this area of [science]
• The people who believe that [animal testing] is necessary tend to say…
• this is wrong for several reasons
• [animal testing] is not as helpful in [developing medicines] as people think
• There are many other reasons why [experimenting with animals] is wrong
• it is grossly unethical to [subject these creatures to painful and demeaning experiences]
• people may argue that there are benefits that come from [experimenting on animals], but in fact there is no good reason to continue doing this

You can try using and modifying these phrases in your own practice essays. If you want an expert to correct them for you, try my IELTS writing correction service .

Language about Animal Testing

The following phrases will also appear in my essay and can be used for talking about animal testing:

• this area of science
• animal testing should be banned
• testing medicines before using them on human beings
• figure out the cures to many serious illnesses
• Medicines that work on animals do not always work on humans
• if scientists give a mouse diabetes and then try various drugs to cure the problem
• subject these creatures to painful and demeaning experiences
• They are sentient beings
• subjected to cruel and often unnecessary experiments
• harmful both to humans and animals

It is also important to avoid repetition and that means finding ways to say “animal testing” without repeating the say words over and over. You could say:

• testing on animals
• experimenting on animals
• subjecting animals to medical experiments
• using animals in experiments

Again, it would be helpful to read articles and listen to podcasts on this topic in order to improve your vocabulary.

Sample Band 9 Answer

Over the past few decades, animal testing has been fiercely debated due to the ethical problems inherent in this area of science. This essay will look at both sides of the debate, before concluding that animal testing should be banned.

The people who believe that animal testing is necessary tend to say that there are serious benefits to humanity, such as testing medicines before using them on human beings. They believe that this will help to figure out the cures to many serious illnesses, which will make the world a better place for humans. However, this is wrong for several reasons.

Firstly, animal testing is not as helpful in developing medicines as people think. Medicines that work on animals do not always work on humans, and vice versa. As such, these trials are not just unnecessary but also profoundly unhelpful. For example, if scientists give a mouse diabetes and then try various drugs to cure the problem, they may find that there are twelve drugs that do not work on the mouse. However, maybe one of those drugs would have worked on a human. As such, animal testing would have caused more problems than it solved.

There are many other reasons why experimenting with animals is wrong. Perhaps most importantly, it is grossly unethical to subject these creatures to painful and demeaning experiences for the benefit of humanity. Animals do not exist for the benefit of people. They are sentient beings that deserve better than to be caged and subjected to cruel and often unnecessary experiments.

In conclusion, people may argue that there are benefits that come from experimenting on animals, but in fact there is no good reason to continue doing this. At best, these experiments are useless and at worst they are unethical and harmful both to humans and animals.

Final Notes

You can see that I have carefully crafted an argument that is strong. You may not agree with it, but it is hard to deny my points, which makes it effective in terms of Task Response. The structure is also solid and the ideas were well connected, making it very good in terms of Coherence and Cohesion . Note the inclusion of realistic and interesting ideas as well as concrete examples. My explanation of testing on mice was particularly effective here. It is better than giving some vague or unexplained idea.

About The Author

David S. Wills

David S. Wills is the author of Scientologist! William S. Burroughs and the 'Weird Cult' and the founder/editor of Beatdom literary journal. He lives and works in rural Cambodia and loves to travel. He has worked as an IELTS tutor since 2010, has completed both TEFL and CELTA courses, and has a certificate from Cambridge for Teaching Writing. David has worked in many different countries, and for several years designed a writing course for the University of Worcester. In 2018, he wrote the popular IELTS handbook, Grammar for IELTS Writing and he has since written two other books about IELTS. His other IELTS website is called IELTS Teaching.

Related Posts

Cambridge IELTS 16 – Sample Answers

March 21, 2022

IELTS Essay: Owning vs Renting Property

March 12, 2021

A Very, Very Difficult IELTS Question [Sample Answer]

June 18, 2021

Sample IELTS Letter: Leaving a Course

March 22, 2020

Leave a reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Download my IELTS Books

Recent Posts

• Ambition and Success: Sample IELTS Essay
• Do the Advantages Outweigh the Disadvantages? – Advice About This Question Type
• Exams vs Continual Assessement [Model Essay]
• British vs American Spelling
• How to Improve your IELTS Writing Score

Recent Comments

• David S. Wills on Writing Correction Service
• raquel on Writing Correction Service
• Lesson Plans
• Model Essays
• TED Video Lessons
• Weekly Roundup

Animal testing IELTS essay

Home  »  IELTS BAND 9 ESSAYS  »  Animal testing IELTS essay

IELTS animal testing essay: Some people think that it is acceptable to use animals in medical research for the benefits of human beings, while other people argue that it is wrong.

Over centuries humans have experimented with many different chemicals, products, and processes, with the final aim of bettering our conditions. Testing products on animals most likely dates back centuries, however, in modern society it is a controversial point. Below is an outline of circumstances when it could be considered acceptable and unacceptable.

Firstly, it is clear that major advances in fighting disease, viruses and illnesses would not have been made without testing products on animals. This is because it is inhumane to test the products on healthy human beings, likewise using computer modelling to predict reactions is only a recent possibility and still not as reliable as testing on animals. Therefore without experiments on animals, breakthroughs in medicine would have been impossible, and most would agree the price paid has been worth it.

Conversely, it could be argued that medical research carried out for mere cosmetic ends is undoubtedly not worth the lives of innocent animals. This is largely for two reasons, firstly a large body of research is said to have been built up previously from past experiments, and secondly there are alternatives such as dermatological testing or using natural ingredients.

For example, retail chains such as Lush and The Body Shop have both made fortunes by positioning themselves as natural solutions against animal testing. Therefore due to the end rationale for testing on animals, and the alternatives available, it is clear it is completely unjustifiable in this situation.

To conclude animal welfare can be side-stepped when the situation is threatening humans and computer alternatives are simply too premature. Nevertheless, when the research has rather fickle motives and viable alternatives do exist, in these cases the loss of animal's lives in inexcusable.

More help for IELTS exam

For a FREE ebook of our top 10 sample task 2 essays, click here!

For more help with your task 2 preparation, take a look at our tutorials:

• IELTS writing task 2 questions
• Get ideas for your task 2
• Full guide to academic collocations for task 2
• How to start your agree/disagree essay
• Useful sentences for IELTS writing task 2
• IELTS writing task 2 tips
• Free Essay Band Score Evaluation
• Sign up to claim your free IELTS materials
• Jump to Band 7 or it’s Free
• IELTS Writing Evaluation
• IELTS Band Score Calculator
• Book Your Online IELTS Test
• Sample Topic Answers
• Useful Sentences
• Sample Task 2 Questions 2022
• Introduction to Paraphrasing
• Model Band 9 Essay
• Five Band 9 Words
• Model Band 7 Essay
• Differences Band 9 vs Band 7 Essay
• Band 6.5 Essay
• Academic Collocations
• Topic Sentences
• Discuss Both Views
• Tutorial: To What Extent Essays
• Paraphrasing Introductions
• Essay Structures
• Essay Plans
• Describe a Pie Chart
• Using Percentages
• Map Vocabulary
• Describe Flow Charts
• Describe a Bar Chart
• How to get Band 9
• AT 1 Sample Questions 2022
• Describe a Graphic
• GT Task 1 Questions 2022
• IELTS Vocabulary
• Google Play / Podcasts
• Apple Podcast
• Android App
• Task 2 Sample Questions
• AT 1 Questions

Company addresses: HK Office: BW ENGLISH SERVICES HK Ltd, Unit 2512, 25/F, Langham Place Office Tower, 8 Argyle Street, Mongkok, Hong Kong UK Office: BW ENGLISH SERVICES, 120 High Road, East Finchley, N29ED, London, England, United Kingdom ​+44 20 3951 8271 ($1/min).

IELTS Blog & IELTS Mock Test

Ielts exam preparation for a higher band score., examine the arguments in favour of and against animal experiments.

IELTS sample Essay

IELTS Essay Topic:  Examine the arguments in favour of and against animal experiments, and come to a conclusion on this issue. You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence. Write at least 250 words.

Sample Answer: Nowadays animal experiments are used to test new drugs and other products, to see impact of some scientific researches etc. While some people support this issue, others are against it. In my essay I will examine both the opinions in details.

One the one hand supporters of animal experimentation argue that there are many reasons which justified their opinion. Firstly, they believe that is necessary to test new drugs before using. Animal experiments are used for very important scientific researches in the medical fields. Humans are the most important being in the planet and everything must be done to insure their survival. Secondly, they argue that recently researchers aim to reduce the pain which animal could experience during the procedure. For example, the inject animals with pain killers or anesthetic drugs. Finally, testing for the cosmetic industry is now banned in many countries.

On the other hand, opponents of animal experiments have many justification of their opinion. Firstly, they argue that it is cruel and unethical to use animals in experiments. Human have no moral right to kill animals and the researches benefits do not justify this issue. They believe that all creatures’ lives should be respected and saved. Also, they believe that there are many other alternative methods of research that can be used instead of animal experiments. For instance, robots and computerised devices could replace animals in this procedure.

In conclusion, there are convincing arguments for and against animal experiment. In my opinion Animal experiments should not be banned until finding other suitable alternative methods.

[ Written by – Safa Ahmed  ]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA + sixty four = sixty eight

Some people think that using animals for experimentation purpose is cruel but other people that it is necessary for the development of science. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Writing9 with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Use a variety of complex and simple sentences

You should use complex sentences in your writing, but it does not mean that you should try to make all of our sentences complex.

‘Complex’ sentences are not actually very complex; they are just two or more simple sentences put together. Putting them together makes the essay more coherent and cohesive.

I really want to study but I’m too tired.

I wore a warm coat because the weather was cold.

If action is not taken soon on climate change , global warming will get worse.

Discover more tips in The Ultimate Guide to Get a Target Band Score of 7+ » — a book that's free for 🚀 Premium users.

• Animal experimentation
• Ethical dilemmas
• Medical breakthroughs
• In vivo testing
• In vitro testing
• Alternative methods
• Regulatory oversight
• Vivisection
• Animal welfare
• Pharmacological research
• Clinical trials
• Moral imperatives
• Check your IELTS essay »
• Find essays with the same topic
• View collections of IELTS Writing Samples
• Show IELTS Writing Task 2 Topics

Some people argue that governments should spend more money on developing bullet and metro rail facilities, while others support the idea of spending money on upgrading current public transport system. discuss both views and give your opinion

Prison is the common way most countries try to solve the problem of crime. however, a more effective solution is to provide the public a better education. to what extent do you agree or disagree (opinion essay), during a recent plane journey, you sat next to a businessman who owns a chain of restaurants. you talked to him and he suggested that you should contact him about a possible job in one of his restaurants. write a letter to this businessman. in your letter, remind him when and where you met tell him what kind of job you are interested in say why you think you would be suitable for the job, smoking is a major cause of serious illness and death throughout the world today. in the interest of the public health, government should ban cigarettes and other tobacco products. to what extent do you agree or disagree, education for young people is important in many countries. however, some people think that the government should spend more money on education in adult populations who cannot read and write. to what extent do you agree or disagree.

Ielts: Opinion on animal experimentation; Should continue!

Do You Belive That Experimentation on Animals- IELTS Writing Task 2

Updated On Aug 14, 2024

Share on Whatsapp

Share on Email

Share on Linkedin

Table of Contents

Sample essay.

Limited-Time Offer : Access a FREE 10-Day IELTS Study Plan!

Do you believe that experimentation on animals for scientific purposes is justified? Are there any alternatives to animal experiments?

Direct Question essay

Introduction

Sentences 1&2 – Paraphrase the essay with the help of synonyms to create an understanding of the topic.

Sentence 3 – Mention that the essay will look at the reasons and question the need to torture animals in the name of medical needs.

Body paragraphs

Paragraph 1 – Notify the audience about the testing on animals for scientific purposes.

Paragraph 2 – Exemplify and inform the audience about the alternatives to animal experiments.

Restate your views.

Medical science has improved tremendously over the last few decades. Most of the medicines available in the market have been tested on animals. Once satisfactory results have been received, those medicines are approved for human use. Regardless, many people question the need to torture animals in the name of medical needs.

To begin with, testing on animals for scientific purposes has been adopted for many years, so there must undoubtedly be a few advantages. Firstly, human life is significant, so trying medicines directly on humans would not be wise. Experimenting on animals is a proven technique. Moreover, science has discovered that the human body is similar to animals and this method is a lot cheaper and more effective in terms of results than a computer simulation. Take anaesthesia as an example. It is used to make animals unconscious and it works similarly on humans.

Science has progressed in all directions. So, we have a few alternatives that should be encouraged to alternate animal experimentation. One of them is to use more natural products. If the demand for the chemical product is reduced, such experiments would be reduced. For instance, many cosmetic companies are selling natural beauty products, clearly mentioned that “Not tried on animals”. If people surge up the use of such products, other cosmetic companies will also try to sell natural products. Likewise, if we can develop medicines to reduce human pain, we should also create medicines to minimise animals’ pain during experiments.

In conclusion, I firmly believe that testing on animals violates the lives of wild animals. Yet, if governments and animal rights supporters work together, animal conservation is more likely to be achieved.

• Tremendously

Meaning – to a very great extent. Example – A number of exercises enhanced student interest and involvement tremendously.

• Satisfactory

Meaning – fulfilling expectations or needs; acceptable, though not outstanding or perfect. Example – No satisfactory explanation was provided from the home office about why the prison population is rising unchecked.

Meaning – the action or practice of inflicting severe pain or suffering on someone as a punishment or in order to force them to do or say something.

Example – The writer insists he knew nothing about the unjust imprisonment and torture practiced by the Party.

• Significant

Meaning – sufficiently great or important to be worthy of attention; noteworthy. Example – In my view, these statements provide a significant key to resolving the issue before me.

• Unconscious

Meaning – not awake and aware of and responding to one’s environment. Example – Elaine is being heavily medicated and seems in a deeply unconscious state.

• Alternatives

Meaning – (of one or more things) available as another possibility or choice. Example – After discussing several alternatives, the team reached a consensus on a plan of action.

Meaning – relating to treatment intended to restore or improve a person’s appearance. Example – Anna received a gift card for a cosmetic makeover at a beauty salon as a birthday surprise.

Meaning – a sudden powerful forward or upward movement, especially by a crowd or by a natural force such as the tide. Example – I felt a huge surge of pride and happiness when my brother won the first prize.

Meaning – reduce (something, especially something undesirable) to the smallest possible amount or degree. Example – Traffic engineers will now be re-timing traffic lights in order to minimise waiting times.

Meaning – break or fail to comply with (a rule or formal agreement). Example – The new rule not only impairs the fair market order but also violates the natural rule of justice.

• IELTS Essay Topics
• IELTS Sample essays
• IELTS Writing task 2 Tips
• Tips to Improve IELTS Writing Skills
• IELTS Writing recent actual test
• IELTS Writing Answer sheet

Practice IELTS Writing Task 2 based on Essay types

Start Preparing for IELTS: Get Your 10-Day Study Plan Today!

Janice Thompson

Soon after graduating with a Master’s in Literature from Southern Arkansas University, she joined an institute as an English language trainer. She has had innumerous student interactions and has produced a couple of research papers on English language teaching. She soon found that non-native speakers struggled to meet the English language requirements set by foreign universities. It was when she decided to jump ship into IELTS training. From then on, she has been mentoring IELTS aspirants. She joined IELTSMaterial about a year ago, and her contributions have been exceptional. Her essay ideas and vocabulary have taken many students to a band 9.

Explore other Direct Question Essays

Post your Comments

Recent articles.

Raajdeep Saha

Kasturika Samanta

Akanksha Tripathi

IELTSMaterial Master Program

1:1 Live Training with Band 9 Teachers

4.9 ( 3452 Reviews )

Our Offices

Gurgaon city scape, gurgaon bptp.

Step 1 of 3

Great going .

Get a free session from trainer

Have you taken test before?

Please select any option

Email test -->

Please enter Email ID

Mobile Band 9 trainer -->

Please enter phone number

Application

Please select any one

Already Registered?

Select a date

Please select a date

Select a time (IST Time Zone)

Please select a time

Mark Your Calendar: Free Session with Expert on

Which exam are you preparing?

Great Going!

The Moscow Signals Declassified Microwave Mysteries: Projects PANDORA and BIZARRE

National Security Archive Posts Special Declassified Collection on Microwave Transmissions Aimed at U.S. Moscow Embassy, 1953-1979 

Was the Moscow Signal a Historical Precedent for the "Havana Syndrome"?

Project BIZARRE: Pentagon Officials Conducted Radiation Tests on Monkeys, Planned Secret Human Experimentation

Washington D.C., September 13, 2022 - On the 5 th  anniversary of the CIA’s September 13, 2017, decision to pull its agents out of Cuba, after several operatives were stricken with what has become known as the “Havana Syndrome,” the National Security Archive today posted the first of a declassified documentation series on the “Moscow Signals”—a decades-long chapter of the Cold War during which Soviet intelligence bathed the U.S. Embassy in Moscow with microwave transmissions on a daily basis, and, in the late 1950s, penetrated the U.S ambassador’s residence with ionizing radiation. The records published   by the Archive are among those being reviewed by a special, high-level panel tasked by the Biden administration to search for clues into the enduring mystery surrounding cognitive brain traumas experienced by several dozen U.S. intelligence and diplomatic personnel in Havana, and elsewhere, over the last five years.

The CIA announced in late August that it is compensating at least a dozen of its officers and operatives for syndrome-related injuries known as “Anomalous Health Incidents” (AHI).

The documents posted today record Project BIZARRE, the actual—and rather appropriate—codename for a program of radiation experiments conducted on monkeys to determine if the Moscow Signal was intended to degrade the abilities of U.S. personnel to function at the Embassy. Project BIZARRE was a highly classified component of Project PANDORA, a broader research effort undertaken by the Defense Department’s Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) that included evaluating blood samples of U.S. personnel posted in Moscow and surveying medical records of crew members of the aircraft carrier USS Saratoga to determine if exposure to radiation-emitting technology on board produced physiological effects.

“The Soviets have reported in the open literature that humans subjected to low-level (non-thermal) modulated microwave radiation, show adverse clinical and physiological effects,” ARPA official Richard Cesaro reported in a TOP SECRET, September 1967, update on Project BIZARRE. “The ARPA BIZARRE program will establish methods which should permit us to relate the behavior of sub-human primates to man under conditions of microwave exposure. This may require direct testing with humans under controlled conditions.” 

Among the documents posted today is the original TOP SECRET “Justification Memorandum for Project Pandora,” written by Cesaro in October 1965, which stated that the White House had ordered a program of “intensive investigative research” “under the code name project ‘TUMS’’—Technical Unidentified Moscow Signal. The posting also includes a SECRET May 1965 memorandum by ARPA scientist Samuel Koslov which argued that “a program to specifically check the complex Moscow signal waveforms on higher primates should be carried out to supply some data base for possible use in a protest action” against the Kremlin. Titled “Biomedical Phenomena,” the memo was obtained by science historian Nicholas H. Steneck for his groundbreaking 1984 study, The Microwave Debate , but has never been published in full on the Internet before now.

OVERVIEW OF THE MOSCOW SIGNAL

Despite four years of efforts, the multi-million-dollar PANDORA-BIZARRE projects failed to prove the early hypothesis that the Russians deployed the microwave beams to degrade the mental and physical abilities of U.S. Embassy officers to perform their diplomatic and intelligence duties. An initial experiment of modulated microwave beams on a single monkey appeared to show an impact on its behavior. But the test was conducted using the CIA’s inaccurate readings that the power of the beams was .5 to one milliwatt—exceeding Soviet safety levels by a factor of 100. In reality, as the CIA correctly determined in 1967, the power density of the beams was "no greater than .05 mw/cm in the Moscow Signal," a level that was well below U.S. and Soviet safety levels, as ARPA official Cesaro advised in a TOP SECRET update on Project BIZARRE from September 1967. At the corrected levels, he reported, the “modulated microwave radiation did not cause the primate to degrade in conducting his work tasks.”

The findings, according to one CIA scientist working with ARPA, indicated that the beams were not dangerous to U.S. personnel at the Embassy. “I feel confident in stating,” as Joe Johnston reported in September 1967 on Project BIZARRE results, “that, at the power levels reported for TUMS, persons exposed are at no risk of injury.”

Another theory pursued by the U.S. intelligence community suggested that the signal served as a jamming device intended to disrupt U.S. espionage operations that were conducted out of a surveillance shed on the roof of the Embassy building. A third, and prevalent, theory is that Soviet intelligence agencies employed the Moscow Signal to activate, power and/or interpret eavesdropping devices in the walls of the Embassy building. “Defense feels we must bear in mind the possibility that some of the signals are [deleted] for the activation or interrogation of audio devices implanted in the Embassy,” stated a TOP SECRET/SENSITIVE White House memorandum for President Ford in February 1976, drawing on the Defense Department’s evaluation of the microwave beams. [Note: The memorandum to President Ford will be posted on September 15.] 

Numerous such bugging devices were discovered in April 1964, hidden in the walls of at least eleven Embassy offices—including the office of the U.S. Defense Attaché. The realization that Soviet intelligence had penetrated the Embassy and compromised secret U.S. communications set in motion a series of countersurveillance measures and a major focus on the mysterious energy beam directed at the building. U.S. technicians first detected the energy rays in 1953, shortly after the Embassy opened, but only began to actively monitor the radiation rays in the early 1960s. A technician from the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security, Maclyn Musser, identified them as microwave radiation and reported, in 1963, that the beam was 50 feet across. “More effort should be made to understand the purpose of the microwave signal directed at the Embassy, or failing in this, to stop it,” Jerome Wiesner, the former chairman of the White House Science Advisory Board advised in a SECRET June 1964 memo on “Bugging of U.S. Embassy, Moscow”—the first document posted today as part of the Moscow Signal collection. “It is hard to understand why we have been so unconcerned about it.”

As the declassified documents posted today record, in the mid-1960s, U.S. national security agencies initiated a series of programs, assessments and operations designed to address the microwave beams, codenamed “TUMS”—Technical Unidentified Moscow Signal. (In the mid-1970s, after a second signal was detected, the codename was upgraded to “MUTS”—Moscow Unidentified Technical Signals.) The Pentagon conducted the Project PANDORA and BIZARRE studies. Those included:

Project Big Boy : A set of medical evaluations of the personnel aboard the Navy’s aircraft carrier Saratoga . ARPA, according to one status report, would place “observers aboard the Saratoga to get base line [sic] readings on selected members of the crew.” The purpose of Project Big Boy was to evaluate physical and mental differences between distinct groups of crewmen: veteran members of the crew whose duties exposed them to microwaves generated by radar instrumentation; newer recruits with no history of previous exposure to microwaves; sailors who were detailed above deck; and others below deck. The study produced no discernible evidence of physiological and psychological differences between the test groups.

The Monkey Experiments : Between 1966 and 1969, ARPA teams conducted and contracted for a series of radiation experiments on chimps and rhesus monkeys, compiling data on behavior modification, heart rates, and tissue and blood analysis, among other physiological elements. (Initially codenamed PANDORA, after the first set of experiments, the primate tests were given their own specific codename—Project BIZARRE.) As members of the ARPA team disagreed on whether the tests had produced any conclusive evidence of radiation exposure on health and behavior, the experiments were sent for outside peer review. One review from the RAND Corporation concluded that “the data do not present any evidence of a behavioral change due to the presence of the special signal within the limits of any reasonable scientific criteria.” Another RAND Corp evaluation of a specific set of experiments noted that it had produced “no material…which is scientifically credible” of any impact. In addition, “animal care was not in accordance with good laboratory practice,” the RAND panel reported. “Examination of the data log indicated that of five monkeys’ deaths, three were certainly due to strangulation resulting from poor experimental design of the restraint system.”

Planning for Human Experimentation : Declassified summaries of the meetings of the PANDORA program’s Science Advisory Committee record preparations to go beyond primate experimentation and use unwitting human subjects who would not be aware of the nature of the radiation tests. Subjects for human testing of radiation impact would be secured from Fort Detrick and subjected to radiation exposure over a period of six months, according to the discussion at an April 1969 meeting. “Study should be double-blind with protection of eyes and gonads,” Committee members suggested. “Shielding of testicles is recommended.” Before any such experiments could be performed, however, the PANDORA/BIZARRE program was shut down in 1970.

The State Department also played a role in the TUMS inquiry, commissioning George Washington University’s Human Cytogenetics Research Laboratory to conduct a SECRET study, “Cytogenetic Evaluation of Mutagen Exposure.” The study gathered, coded and analyzed blood samples taken under false pretenses from U.S. personnel posted in Moscow. They were told that the State Department Medical Office was monitoring the spread of Russian viruses. Publicly, the research was given the innocuous title: “The Moscow Viral Study.”

Among other countersurveillance measures that remain highly classified, the CIA monitored the signal and, in 1965, sent a special technician to evaluate security at the Embassy. He recommended installing thin shields on the Embassy windows to block the radiation beams from entering the building—a recommendation that went unimplemented for more than a decade, according to documents obtained by the Associated Press .

U.S. officials also undertook efforts to convince the Soviet leadership to shut off the signal. The first high-level effort took place at a June 1967 superpower summit held in Glassboro, N.J., between U.S. President Lyndon Johnson and Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin. At a side meeting, Secretary of State Dean Rusk told Soviet foreign minister Andrei Gromyko that “we were very much concerned at an electro-magnetic signal directed at our Chancery building in Moscow.” “We did not know the purpose of this activity,” Rusk said, according to a declassified memorandum of conversation, but the U.S. wanted “the matter to be investigated and the activity stopped.” In response, Soviet ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin suggested that the U.S. was conducting “similar activity” against the Soviet Mission in New York and the Soviet Embassy in Washington. While expressing skepticism at the U.S. claims—which were, in fact, incorrect—that the radiation exceeded Soviet safety standards, Gromyko “indicated he would look into the matter.”

But the daily doses of radiation continued. By mid-1975, U.S. intelligence monitors detected additional, and stronger, signals aimed at the Embassy. Hundreds of diplomats, security and intelligence officers, and their families who lived in the residence section of the Consulate building, were unknowingly exposed to radiation for up to 19 hours a day.

The U.S. ambassador, Walter Stoessel, became the unsung hero of the Moscow Signal saga in the fall of 1975 when he forcefully pushed a reluctant Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, to pressure the Kremlin to terminate the transmissions and to authorize a classified briefing for the Embassy staff—who had been kept in the dark about the existence of the Moscow Signal. A strictly confidential Embassy staff briefing was scheduled in early February 1976, cancelled, and then rescheduled and held. Sensitive information Stoessel shared with U.S. Embassy personnel immediately leaked to U.S. newspapers, setting off a major scandal in U.S.-Soviet relations. 

AN INCOMPLETE HISTORICAL RECORD

The publicity surrounding the Moscow Signal generated congressional inquiries and hearings and renewed internal U.S. government efforts to halt the transmissions. The National Security Agency eventually sent one of its leading technical officers, Charles Gandy, to Moscow to assess Embassy security and to determine how the microwave beams were being used to intercept U.S. Embassy communications and identify U.S. spies in Russia. Gandy’s investigation became the focus of a recent book, The Spy in Moscow Station,  by former NSA official Eric Haseltine.

But the intelligence operations and assessments produced by the NSA and CIA on the Moscow Signal remain TOP SECRET. “Information on nonbiological testing that followed the discovery of the Moscow signal is still classified,” Professor Steneck noted in his book, The Microwave Debate , which contained several detailed chapters on the microwave beams and the U.S. government response when it was published in 1984. After nearly four decades, almost none of the intelligence community’s records on the Moscow Signal have been released.

Pursuant to demands by Congress, however, the U.S. government did begin to declassify select parts of the history of U.S. efforts to understand and address the Moscow Signal. ARPA declassified some documentation for a 1979 investigation by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Other records were obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by Steneck while researching his book. In the mid-1980s, the Associated Press used the FOIA to obtain several thousand pages of records. An investigative reporter named Michael Drosnin also obtained numerous PANDORA documents under the FOIA but never published the information they contained. Some of the PANDORA documents were eventually posted on a Pentagon website and later used by former Foreign Policy executive editor Sharon Weinberger in her book, Imagineers of War: The Untold Story of DARPA, the Pentagon Agency That Changed the World . The book was excerpted in an article for the Foreign Policy website, “The Secret History of Diplomats and Invisible Weapons,” that noted that the alleged use of a “sound weapon” against U.S. Embassy officials in Cuba “harks back to a Cold War medical mystery” in Russia. Former U.S. diplomats who were exposed to the Moscow Signal in the 1970s—especially those who believe their rare blood cancer illnesses derive from that exposure—have also written about the parallels with the "Havana Syndrome." “It is like ‘déjà vu’ all over again,” said retired diplomat James Schumacher, who was posted in Moscow over 40 years ago and wrote in an article for the American Foreign Service Association titled “Before Havana Syndrome, There Was Moscow Signal.”

The National Security Archive obtained the declassification of phone conversations between Henry Kissinger and Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin relating to the Moscow Signal through the FOIA and has located dozens of reports on PANDORA/BIZARRE—along with diplomatic cables and reports relating to the diplomacy with the Kremlin to end the microwave beams—in the files of the National Archives and various presidential libraries. The Archive will continue to use the FOIA to uncover the full historical record on this episode, including the CIA assessments and the still secret records on how Washington and the Kremlin negotiated an end to the microwave transmissions.

Part II of the series,  “The Moscow Signals Declassified: Microwave Diplomacy,”  which records more than ten years of back channel diplomatic efforts to address the radiation beams aimed at the Embassy, will be posted on September 15, 2022. Part III,  “Irradiating Richard Nixon,”  which documents ionizing radiation detected during the Vice President's 1959 trip to Moscow, will be posted the week of September 19th. A supplementary, special collection of documentation on “Moscow Signals Declassified,” will also be posted the week of September 19.

Acknowledgements : The National Security Archive respectfully thanks Nicholas Steneck for his original, groundbreaking research on the Moscow Signal, and for his support and encouragement on this project; and also Louis Slesin for his assistance. Thanks also to Jacqueline Schluger, George Washington University, for research assistance on this posting.

The Documents

National Security Archive, John Prados and Arturo Jimenez-Bacardi, eds., “Understanding the CIA,” Document 14

In the wake of the discovery of 17 Soviet listening devices hidden in the walls of U.S. Embassy in Moscow in June 1964, the chairman of the President’s Scientific Advisory Committee, MIT Provost Jerome Wiesner, conducted a security review of the Embassy. His classified report to Clark Clifford, who chaired the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB), contains a number of recommendations, among them using headsets and microphones to conduct secure conversations in the building, “inducing masking sounds” into the walls to disable the function of the eavesdropping equipment, and mounting screens to block electromagnetic-reflection surveillance operations. Wiesner also sounds the alarm on the microwave radiation beams that have been bathing the building for a decade: “More effort should be made to understand the purpose of the microwave signal directed at the Embassy, or failing in this, to stop it,” he advised. “It is hard to understand why we have been so unconcerned about it.”

Nicholas H. Steneck personal collection

In one of the earliest arguments in favor of conducting experiments to explain the Moscow Signal, scientist Samuel Koslov of the Defense Department’s Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) sends a memo to the State Department’s security office with a brief overview, based on Soviet scientific literature, of the “possible effects of low level continuous exposure” to radiation on human health. “A possible explanation of the Moscow Signal may reside in an attempt to produce a relatively low level neurophysiological condition among Embassy personnel,” Koslov postulates, while admitting that “the detailed studies of the signal do not give this a high probability of interest.” Koslov insists, erroneously, that “the Soviet irradiation of the Embassy exceeds their own ambient safety level by a factor of 100.” (Initially, U.S. intelligence significantly overestimated the strength of the signal when, in fact, it was well below both Soviet and U.S. safety standards.) He advocates for “a program to specifically check the complex Moscow signal waveform on higher primates” in order to “supply some data base for possible use in a protest action.” Within a few months, ARPA receives authorization to initiate a secret program to test the impact of radiation exposure on the behavior of monkeys.

Drosnin FOIA, DoD Reading Room

ARPA initiates a special research program codenamed “Project PANDORA.” In this memorandum introducing the project, supervisor Richard Cesaro explains that the U.S. Embassy in Moscow has been radiated with low-level electromagnetic beams on a continuous basis for a number of years. In response, the White House has ordered the U.S. Intelligence Board to assure that “intensive investigative research be conducted within the State Department, CIA and DOD to attempt to determine what the actual threat is and stop it.” The code name for the multi-agency efforts is “TUMS”–Technically Unidentified Moscow Signal. But, Cesaro advises, the ARPA contribution “is known as Project PANDORA” and will address “one of the potential threats, that of radiation effects on man.” Cesaro informs the other agencies participating in the project that a “program has been outlined to irradiate a group of primates under carefully controlled conditions simulating the dosages and complex modulation of the threat.” Cesaro adds that, “The trained primates will be carefully observed under varying and controlled irradiated conditions in an attempt to determine if any changes in their behavior or physiological condition can be detected.” Eventually, as ARPA expands its work on the Moscow Signal, the experiments on rhesus monkeys will be referred to as “Project BIZARRE.”

Nicholas Steneck research papers, Gerald Ford Presidential Library

The State Department’s medical office cables the U.S. Embassy in Moscow to advise them of the “Moscow Viral Study” that the department is conducting as a cover story to draw blood from U.S. personnel to research the physiological effects of the Moscow Signal. To identify potential subjects, the Department requests quarterly reports on employees and dependents who are due to return from Moscow to the U.S. for home leave.

The State Department medical office offers George Washington University an 11-month contract to evaluate and code blood samples taken from Moscow Embassy diplomats, employees, and dependents. The project is titled “Cytogenetic Evaluation of Mutagenic Exposure” and will be supervised by Dr. Cecil Jacobson, a George Washington University scientist assigned to the Human Cytogenetics Research Laboratory who is on the PANDORA team. In a reference to PANDORA, a summary of the contract states that the human blood samples may inform experimentation on animals. “Confirmative animal experiments will be undertaken later,” states a summary of the program.

U.S. National Archives, Department of State Records (RG 59), Subject Numeric Files, 1967-1969, BG Moscow 13

During the June 1967 Summit between President Lyndon Johnson and Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin, U.S. officials issue the first high-level protest of the ongoing microwave signals. At a side meeting between Secretary of State Dean Rusk and Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko, Rusk stated that “we were very much concerned at an electro-magnetic signal directed at our Chancery building in Moscow.” Rusk said the U.S. “did not know the purpose of this activity,” but said the U.S. wanted “the matter to be investigated and the activity stopped.” In response, Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin suggested that the U.S. was conducting “similar activity” against the Soviet Mission in New York and the Soviet Embassy in Washington. While expressing skepticism at the U.S. claims, Gromyko “indicated he would look into the matter.”

In a special summary to a colleague, the CIA’s representative on Project PANDORA/BIZARRE, Joseph Johnston, records the status of the experiments. He notes that analysis of the “TUMS power levels” has been revised and considerably lowered. There is now “reasonable certainty that the power level is not over 50 microwatts/cm2” but closer to 2 microwatts/cm2 at its average high level. Citing the results of the first test on a monkey (which were conducted when U.S. analysts mistakenly believed the signal was at a higher power level than it was) Johnston notes that there were “pronounced behavioral affects [and] performance decrement.” The impact on behavior, he suggests, was “due to the modulation feature” of the signal, “and not to the energy bearing carrier frequency.” “This very intriguing and important observation in one animal must be pursued,” he advises, and confirmed by an independent laboratory. Johnston emphasizes that “all positive findings of Project BIZARRE were achieved at one half an order of magnitude below the accepted U.S. standard for safe exposure.” Moreover, subsequent experiments at the adjusted lower level of radiation “produced no behavioral effects,” Johnston points out. He concludes: “I feel confident in stating that, at the power levels reported for TUMS, persons exposed are at no risk of injury.”

Ricard S. Cesaro, overseer of the PANDORA/BIZARRE program, sends a “progress report on Project BIZARRE” to the ARPA research and engineering director in September 1967. His report references a series of previous updates on subjecting primates to microwave exposure, as well as a secret CIA memorandum titled “Summary of TUMS Power Density Measurements” which reported that the levels of the microwaves beamed at the U.S. Embassy were considerably lower than previously believed. (They were, in fact, at levels below the Soviet safety standards, and likely not threatening to human health.) [1] “New measurements with ARPA instrumentation of the ‘Moscow Signal’ on site has [sic] now been completed,” Cesaro advises. Using the corrected level, “the recent BIZARRE tests have completed one experiment on primate behavior” that demonstrates “no overt primate performance degradation …” Even so, Cesaro’s memo lays out the argument to go beyond radiation experiments on monkeys and conduct tests on human subjects. “The ARPA BIZARRE program will establish methods which should permit us to relate the behavior of sub-human primates to man under conditions of microwave exposure,” he advises. “This may require direct testing with humans under controlled conditions.”

ARPA official Herbert Pollack reports on a meeting held on the USS Saratoga aircraft carrier with key naval officers to discuss a new PANDORA project. The project will review medical records of the ship’s personnel, and place “observers aboard the Saratoga to get base line readings on selected members of the crew.” The purpose of the study is to evaluate medical differences between distinct groups of crewmen: veteran members of the crew whose duties exposed them to microwaves generated by radar instrumentation; and new recruits with no history of previous exposure to microwaves. At ARPA, the project is code-named operation “Big Boy.”

Document 10

In one of a series of monthly meetings in 1969, Pandora’s scientific-government board reviews its research efforts on the Moscow Signal. The first part of the meeting covers the initial results of project “Big Boy,” the study of the crew of the USS Saratoga . Early tests “were negative,” finding “no significant differences in psychological tests performed on apparently exposed and control groups,” and no “significant differences” in genetic and physical findings. After almost four years of experiments on monkeys, the panel agrees that “there is at present insufficient evidence to draw conclusions” about the potential impact of the Moscow Signal on human behavior. The inconclusive nature of the research reinforces proposals at the meeting to move beyond exposing monkeys to radiation to “develop[ing] a human program.” Subjects for human testing of radiation impact could be secured from Fort Detrick (misspelled as “Ft. Dietrich” in the document) and subjected to radiation exposure over a period of six months, according to the discussion. “Study should be double-blind with protection of eyes and gonads,” the board suggests. “Shielding of testicles is recommended.”

Document 11

The PANDORA officials devote most of this meeting to developing a specific protocol for subjecting humans to radiation tests, addressing the levels of radiation to be used, and the “behavioral aspects of the program.” They also discuss “classification considerations” and “an appropriate cover” story to maintain secrecy around the research, including from the personnel being subjected to the tests. “DOD regards the general line of effort to acquire human-based data on effects of the signal, with appropriate safeguards, as a high priority,” the minutes state. “ARPA believes that the entire effort should be classified for several reasons.” Reflecting the sensitivity around the issue of human testing, according to the minutes “It was urged that DOD provide written security specifications and guide for the program.” (Emphasis in original.)

Document 12

Drosnin FOIA, DOD Reading Room

RAND Corp. scientist Samuel Koslov, the former ARPA official who in 1965 who helped initiate the PANDORA project, assesses the data generated by several years of experiments on the impact of radiation on the behavior of rhesus monkeys. “I am forced to conclude that the data do not present any evidence of a behavioral change due to the presence of the special signal within the limits of any reasonable scientific criteria,” he writes. “There is evidence of behavioral change in some cases but this change could be attributed to a variety of causes or systematic measurement errors all well within the limits of experimental methodology. Evidence of other effects such as EEG, histology, and chromosomal analyses have not accumulated with either adequate detail or control to tell whether effects due to radiation are present.”

Document 13

U.S. National Archives, Record Group 46, Records of U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, 90 to 95th Congress, Project Pandora Folder

In response to a request from the Navy, a panel of experts led by RAND Corporation scientist Samuel Koslov evaluates one of the last Project BIZARRE-type contracts for radiation experimentation on monkeys and rabbits. The panel concludes that the leading experiments to measure the impact of “long-term, low-level chronic exposure of primates” to radiation have produced “no material … which is scientifically credible ….” Among the factors the panel cites are the failure of the Navy to provide proper radiation devices, bad management, poorly trained technicians, and “poor” animal care. “Animal care was not in accordance with good laboratory practice,” the panel reported, citing the death of five of the monkeys. “Examination of the data log indicated that of five monkeys’ deaths, three were certainly due to strangulation resulting from poor experimental design of the restraint system.”

Document 14

In the aftermath of the scandal over the Moscow Signal, and publication of a high-profile article on the subject in The New Yorker magazine by Paul Broduer, several congressional committees investigate U.S. government efforts to address the microwave beams, including the PANDORA and BIZARRE projects at DARPA. In response to a series of questions posed by Representative Warren Magnuson, chairman of the House Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, DARPA director George H. Heilmeier transmits this letter providing answers and a general summary of the PANDORA program. Among the details: PANDORA was shut down in March 1970 after almost five years of work; its total costs amounted to $4,615,000. Heilmeier misleads the committee by denying that PANDORA was intended to “probe” the use of microwaves as a form of “mind control.” He also states that DARPA “does not foresee the development, by DARPA, of weapons using microwaves and actively being directed toward altering nervous system function or behavior. Neither are we aware of any of our own forces or possible adversary forces developing such weapons.” In the letter, Heilmeier also announces that meeting minutes of the PANDORA board have been declassified.

Document 15

U.S. Senate Committee Print

Following the scandal of the Moscow Signal, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation conducts a lengthy review of the documentation on the PANDORA/BIZARRE projects and of various official investigations in an effort to determine the health and safety effects on U.S. personnel who served at the Embassy. This staff report criticizes the official secrecy that kept U.S. personnel in the dark about the ongoing radiation: “Embassy employees were not informed by the State Department of the presence of this radiation throughout the period from its initial discovery until early 1976,” the report notes. “The employees should have been promptly informed of the situation.” At the same time, the report concludes that as of 1979 the medical survey studies on U.S. personnel showed no discernible evidence of impact on health from exposure to the low-level radiation beams. “No convincing evidence was discovered that could directly implicate the exposure to microwave radiation experienced by the employees at the Moscow Embassy in the causation of any adverse health effects as of the time of this analysis,” the Senate inquiry concluded, with the caveat that “it is too early to have been able to detect long-term mortality effects” among hundreds of U.S. personnel exposed to radiation waves between 1953 and 1977.

[1] See also Nicholas Steneck, The Microwave Debate (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1985), 110.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

An Experiment in Lust, Regret and Kissing

By Curtis Sittenfeld

Ms. Sittenfeld is the best-selling author of seven novels and the forthcoming story collection “Show Don’t Tell.”

This summer, I agreed to a literary experiment with Times Opinion: What is the difference between a story written by a human and a story written by artificial intelligence?

We decided to hold a contest between ChatGPT and me, to see who could write — or “write” — a better beach read. I thought going head-to-head with the machine would give us real answers about what A.I. is and isn’t currently capable of and, of course, how big a threat it is to human writers. And if you’ve wondered, as I have, what exactly makes something a beach read — frothy themes or sand under your feet? — we set out to get to the bottom of that, too.

First, we asked readers to vote on which themes they wanted in their ideal beach read. We also included some options that are staples of my fiction, including privilege, self-consciousness and ambivalence. ChatGPT and I would then work using the top vote-getters.

Lust, regret and kissing won, in that order. Readers also wrote in suggestions. They wanted beach reads about naps and redemption and tattoos gone wrong; puppies and sharks and secrets and white linen caftans; margaritas and roller coasters and mosquitoes; yearning and bonfires and women serious about their vocations. At least 10 readers suggested variations on making the characters middle-aged. One reader wrote, “We tend to equate summer with kids,” and suggested I explore “Why does summer still feel special for older people?”

So I added middle-age and another write-in, flip-flops — because it seemed fun, easy and, yes, summery — to the list and got to work on a 1,000-word story.

My editor fed ChatGPT the same prompts I was writing from and asked it to write a story of the same length “in the style of Curtis Sittenfeld.” ( I’m one of the many fiction writers whose novels were used, without my permission and without my being compensated, to train ChatGPT. Groups of fiction writers, including people I’m friends with, have sued OpenAI, which developed ChatGPT, for copyright infringement. The New York Times has sued Microsoft and OpenAI over the use of copyrighted work.)

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Try AI-powered search

• AI scientists are producing new theories of how the brain learns

The challenge for neuroscientists is how to test them

Your browser does not support the <audio> element.

F ive DECADES of research into artificial neural networks have earned Geoffrey Hinton the moniker of the Godfather of artificial intelligence ( AI ) . Work by his group at the University of Toronto laid the foundations for today’s headline-grabbing AI models , including Chat GPT and L a MDA . These can write coherent (if uninspiring) prose, diagnose illnesses from medical scans and navigate self-driving cars. But for Dr Hinton, creating better models was never the end goal. His hope was that by developing artificial neural networks that could learn to solve complex problems, light might be shed on how the brain’s neural networks do the same.

Brains learn by being subtly rewired: some connections between neurons, known as synapses, are strengthened, while others must be weakened. But because the brain has billions of neurons, of which millions could be involved in any single task, scientists have puzzled over how it knows which synapses to tweak and by how much. Dr Hinton popularised a clever mathematical algorithm known as backpropagation to solve this problem in artificial neural networks. But it was long thought to be too unwieldy to have evolved in the human brain. Now, as AI models are beginning to look increasingly human-like in their abilities, scientists are questioning whether the brain might do something similar after all.

Working out how the brain does what it does is no easy feat. Much of what neuroscientists understand about human learning comes from experiments on small slices of brain tissue, or handfuls of neurons in a Petri dish. It’s often not clear whether living, learning brains work by scaled-up versions of these same rules, or if something more sophisticated is taking place. Even with modern experimental techniques, wherein neuroscientists track hundreds of neurons at a time in live animals, it is hard to reverse-engineer what is really going on.

One of the most prominent and longstanding theories of how the brain learns is Hebbian learning. The idea is that neurons which activate at roughly the same time become more strongly connected; often summarised as “cells that fire together wire together”. Hebbian learning can explain how brains learn simple associations—think of Pavlov’s dogs salivating at the sound of a bell. But for more complicated tasks, like learning a language, Hebbian learning seems too inefficient. Even with huge amounts of training, artificial neural networks trained in this way fall well short of human levels of performance.

Today’s top AI models are engineered differently. To understand how they work, imagine an artificial neural network trained to spot birds in images. Such a model would be made up of thousands of synthetic neurons, arranged in layers. Pictures are fed into the first layer of the network, which sends information about the content of each pixel to the next layer through the AI equivalent of synaptic connections. Here, neurons may use this information to pick out lines or edges before sending signals to the next layer, which might pick out eyes or feet. This process continues until the signals reach the final layer responsible for getting the big call right: “bird” or “not bird”.

Integral to this learning process is the so-called backpropagation-of-error algorithm, often known as backprop. If the network is shown an image of a bird but mistakenly concludes that it is not, then—once it realises the gaffe—it generates an error signal. This error signal moves backwards through the network, layer by layer, strengthening or weakening each connection in order to minimise any future errors. If the model is shown a similar image again, the tweaked connections will lead the model to correctly declare: “bird”.

Neuroscientists have always been sceptical that backpropagation could work in the brain. In 1989, shortly after Dr Hinton and his colleagues showed that the algorithm could be used to train layered neural networks, Francis Crick, the Nobel laureate who co-discovered the structure of DNA , published a takedown of the theory in the journal Nature . Neural networks using the backpropagation algorithm were biologically “unrealistic in almost every respect” he said.

For one thing, neurons mostly send information in one direction. For backpropagation to work in the brain, a perfect mirror image of each network of neurons would therefore have to exist in order to send the error signal backwards. In addition, artificial neurons communicate using signals of varying strengths. Biological neurons, for their part, send signals of fixed strengths, which the backprop algorithm is not designed to deal with.

All the same, the success of neural networks has renewed interest in whether some kind of backprop happens in the brain. There have been promising experimental hints it might. A preprint study published in November 2023, for example, found that individual neurons in the brains of mice do seem to be responding to unique error signals, one of the crucial ingredients of backprop-like algorithms long thought lacking in living brains.

Scientists working at the boundary between neuroscience and AI have also shown that small tweaks to backprop can make it more brain-friendly. One influential study showed that the mirror-image network once thought necessary does not have to be an exact replica of the original for learning to take place (albeit more slowly for big networks). This makes it less implausible. Others have found ways of bypassing a mirror network altogether. If artificial neural networks can be given biologically realistic features, such as specialised neurons that can integrate activity and error signals in different parts of the cell, then backprop can occur with a single set of neurons. Some researchers have also made alterations to the backprop algorithm to allow it to process spikes rather than continuous signals.

Other researchers are exploring rather different theories. In a paper published in Nature Neuroscience earlier this year, Yuhang Song and colleagues at Oxford University laid out a method that flips backprop on its head. In conventional backprop, error signals lead to adjustments in the synapses, which in turn cause changes in neuronal activity. The Oxford researchers proposed that the network could change the activity in the neurons first, and only then adjust the synapses to fit. They called this prospective configuration.

When the authors tested out prospective configuration in artificial neural networks they found that they learned in a much more human-like way—more robustly and with less training—than models trained with backprop. They also found that the network offered a much closer match for human behaviour on other very different tasks, such as one that involved learning how to move a joystick in response to different visual cues.

Learning the hard way

For now though, all of these theories are just that. Designing experiments to prove whether backprop, or any other algorithm, is at play in the brain is surprisingly tricky. For Aran Nayebi and colleagues at Stanford University this seemed like a problem AI could solve.

The scientists used one of four different learning algorithms to train over a thousand neural networks to perform a variety of tasks. They then monitored each network during training, recording neuronal activity and the strength of synaptic connections. Dr Nayebi and his colleagues then trained another supervisory meta-model to deduce the learning algorithm from the recordings. They found that the meta-model could tell which of the four algorithms had been used by recording just a couple of hundreds of virtual neurons at various intervals during learning. The researchers hope such a meta-model could do something similar with equivalent recordings of a real brain.

Identifying the algorithm, or algorithms, that the brain uses to learn would be a big step forward for neuroscience. Not only would it shed light on how the body’s most mysterious organ works, it could also help scientists build new AI -powered tools to try to understand specific neural processes. Whether it could lead to better AI algorithms is unclear. For Dr Hinton, at least, backprop is probably superior to whatever happens in the brain. ■

Curious about the world? To enjoy our mind-expanding science coverage, sign up to  Simply Science , our weekly subscriber-only newsletter.

Explore more

This article appeared in the Science & technology section of the print edition under the headline “Great minds”

Science & technology August 17th 2024

Exposure to the sun’s uv radiation may be good for you, climate change could reawaken harmful invasive plants, why a new art gallery in bangalore is important for indian science.

From the August 17th 2024 edition

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

More from Science & technology

It aims to make research and tinkering more accessible to the public

The sooner they can be weeded out, the better

For now, though, keep the sun cream handy

Engineered dust could help make Mars habitable

Restoring water on Mars may be easier than you think

New batteries are stretchable enough to wear against the skin

They take their inspiration from electric eels

Do women make better doctors than men?

Research suggests yes